[Intel-gfx] [RFC 6/9] drm/i915: Delay the freeing of requests until retire time

Tvrtko Ursulin tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Thu Jul 23 07:25:14 PDT 2015


Hi,

On 07/17/2015 03:31 PM, John.C.Harrison at Intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
>
> The request structure is reference counted. When the count reached
> zero, the request was immediately freed and all associated objects
> were unrefereced/unallocated. This meant that the driver mutex lock
> must be held at the point where the count reaches zero. This was fine
> while all references were held internally to the driver. However, the
> plan is to allow the underlying fence object (and hence the request
> itself) to be returned to other drivers and to userland. External
> users cannot be expected to acquire a driver private mutex lock.
>
> Rather than attempt to disentangle the request structure from the
> driver mutex lock, the decsion was to defer the free code until a
> later (safer) point. Hence this patch changes the unreference callback
> to merely move the request onto a delayed free list. The driver's
> retire worker thread will then process the list and actually call the
> free function on the requests.
>
> [new patch in series]
>
> For: VIZ-5190
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h         | 22 +++---------------
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c         | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c    |  2 +-
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c        |  2 ++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c         |  2 +-
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c |  2 ++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h |  4 ++++
>   7 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index 88a4746..61c3db2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -2161,14 +2161,9 @@ void i915_gem_track_fb(struct drm_i915_gem_object *old,
>    * initial reference taken using kref_init
>    */
>   struct drm_i915_gem_request {
> -	/**
> -	 * Underlying object for implementing the signal/wait stuff.
> -	 * NB: Never return this fence object to user land! It is unsafe to
> -	 * let anything outside of the i915 driver get hold of the fence
> -	 * object as the clean up when decrementing the reference count
> -	 * requires holding the driver mutex lock.
> -	 */
> +	/** Underlying object for implementing the signal/wait stuff. */
>   	struct fence fence;
> +	struct list_head delay_free_list;

Maybe call this delay_free_link to continue the established convention.

>
>   	/** On Which ring this request was generated */
>   	struct drm_i915_private *i915;
> @@ -2281,21 +2276,10 @@ i915_gem_request_reference(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req)
>   static inline void
>   i915_gem_request_unreference(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req)
>   {
> -	WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&req->ring->dev->struct_mutex));
> -	fence_put(&req->fence);
> -}
> -
> -static inline void
> -i915_gem_request_unreference__unlocked(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req)
> -{
> -	struct drm_device *dev;
> -
>   	if (!req)
>   		return;
>
> -	dev = req->ring->dev;
> -	if (kref_put_mutex(&req->fence.refcount, fence_release, &dev->struct_mutex))
> -		mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> +	fence_put(&req->fence);
>   }
>
>   static inline void i915_gem_request_assign(struct drm_i915_gem_request **pdst,
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index af79716..482835a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -2616,10 +2616,27 @@ static void i915_set_reset_status(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
>   	}
>   }
>
> -static void i915_gem_request_free(struct fence *req_fence)
> +static void i915_gem_request_release(struct fence *req_fence)
>   {
>   	struct drm_i915_gem_request *req = container_of(req_fence,
>   						 typeof(*req), fence);
> +	struct intel_engine_cs *ring = req->ring;
> +	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(ring->dev);
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Need to add the request to a deferred dereference list to be
> +	 * processed at a mutex lock safe time.
> +	 */
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&ring->delayed_free_lock, flags);

At the moment there is no request unreferencing from irq handlers right? 
Unless (or until) you plan to add that you could use simple spin_lock 
here. (And in the i915_gem_retire_requests_ring.)

> +	list_add_tail(&req->delay_free_list, &ring->delayed_free_list);
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ring->delayed_free_lock, flags);
> +
> +	queue_delayed_work(dev_priv->wq, &dev_priv->mm.retire_work, 0);

Have you decided to re-use the retire worker just for convenience of for 
some other reason as well?

I found it a bit unexpected and though dedicated request free worker 
would be cleaner, but I don't know, not a strong opinion.

> +}
> +
> +static void i915_gem_request_free(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req)
> +{
>   	struct intel_context *ctx = req->ctx;
>
>   	BUG_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&req->ring->dev->struct_mutex));
> @@ -2696,7 +2713,7 @@ static const struct fence_ops i915_gem_request_fops = {
>   	.enable_signaling	= i915_gem_request_enable_signaling,
>   	.signaled		= i915_gem_request_is_completed,
>   	.wait			= fence_default_wait,
> -	.release		= i915_gem_request_free,
> +	.release		= i915_gem_request_release,
>   	.fence_value_str	= i915_fence_value_str,
>   	.timeline_value_str	= i915_fence_timeline_value_str,
>   };
> @@ -2992,6 +3009,21 @@ i915_gem_retire_requests_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *ring)
>   		i915_gem_request_assign(&ring->trace_irq_req, NULL);
>   	}
>
> +	while (!list_empty(&ring->delayed_free_list)) {
> +		struct drm_i915_gem_request *request;
> +		unsigned long flags;
> +
> +		request = list_first_entry(&ring->delayed_free_list,
> +					   struct drm_i915_gem_request,
> +					   delay_free_list);

Need a spinlock to sample list head here. Then maybe move it on a 
temporary list and do the freeing afterwards.

Regards,

Tvrtko


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list