[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: remove distinction between explicit and implicit sync (v2)
ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com
Wed Jun 10 07:41:47 UTC 2020
That's true, but for now we are stuck with the implicit sync for quite a
number of use cases.
My problem is rather that we already tried this and it backfired
I do remember that it was your patch who introduced the pipeline sync
flag handling and I warned that this could be problematic. You then came
back with a QA result saying that this is indeed causing a huge
performance drop in one test case and we need to do something else.
Together we then came up with the different handling between implicit
and explicit sync.
But I can't find that stupid mail thread any more. I knew that it was a
couple of years ago when we started with the explicit sync for Vulkan.
Am 10.06.20 um 08:29 schrieb Zhou, David(ChunMing):
> [AMD Official Use Only - Internal Distribution Only]
> Not sue if this is right direction, I think usermode wants all
> synchronizations to be explicit. Implicit sync often confuses people
> who don’t know its history. I remember Jason from Intel is driving
> explicit synchronization through the Linux ecosystem, which even
> removes implicit sync of shared buffer.
> *From:* amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> *On Behalf Of
> *Marek Olšák
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:58 PM
> *To:* amd-gfx mailing list <amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>
> *Subject:* [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: remove distinction between explicit and
> implicit sync (v2)
> This enables a full pipeline sync for implicit sync. It's Christian's
> patch with the driver version bumped. With this, user mode drivers
> don't have to wait for idle at the end of gfx IBs.
> Any concerns?
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the amd-gfx