[PATCH v2 1/4] drm/vc4: Use DRM Execution Contexts
Melissa Wen
mwen at igalia.com
Mon Dec 16 19:08:43 UTC 2024
On 12/12, Maíra Canal wrote:
> VC4 has internal copies of `drm_gem_lock_reservations()` and
> `drm_gem_unlock_reservations()` inside the driver and ideally, we should
> move those hard-coded functions to the generic functions provided by DRM.
> But, instead of using the DRM GEM functions to (un)lock reservations, move
> the new DRM Execution Contexts API.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mcanal at igalia.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c | 99 ++++++++---------------------------
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig
> index c5f30b317698..0627e826fda4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ config DRM_VC4
> select DRM_DISPLAY_HDMI_HELPER
> select DRM_DISPLAY_HDMI_STATE_HELPER
> select DRM_DISPLAY_HELPER
> + select DRM_EXEC
> select DRM_KMS_HELPER
> select DRM_GEM_DMA_HELPER
> select DRM_PANEL_BRIDGE
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c
> index 22bccd69eb62..1021f45cb53c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c
> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
> #include <linux/sched/signal.h>
> #include <linux/dma-fence-array.h>
>
> +#include <drm/drm_exec.h>
> #include <drm/drm_syncobj.h>
>
> #include "uapi/drm/vc4_drm.h"
> @@ -578,19 +579,6 @@ vc4_update_bo_seqnos(struct vc4_exec_info *exec, uint64_t seqno)
> }
> }
>
> -static void
> -vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
> - struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> - struct ww_acquire_ctx *acquire_ctx)
> -{
> - int i;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < exec->bo_count; i++)
> - dma_resv_unlock(exec->bo[i]->resv);
> -
> - ww_acquire_fini(acquire_ctx);
> -}
> -
> /* Takes the reservation lock on all the BOs being referenced, so that
> * at queue submit time we can update the reservations.
> *
> @@ -599,70 +587,23 @@ vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
> * to vc4, so we don't attach dma-buf fences to them.
> */
> static int
> -vc4_lock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
> - struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> - struct ww_acquire_ctx *acquire_ctx)
> +vc4_lock_bo_reservations(struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> + struct drm_exec *exec_ctx)
> {
> - int contended_lock = -1;
> - int i, ret;
> - struct drm_gem_object *bo;
> -
> - ww_acquire_init(acquire_ctx, &reservation_ww_class);
> -
> -retry:
> - if (contended_lock != -1) {
> - bo = exec->bo[contended_lock];
> - ret = dma_resv_lock_slow_interruptible(bo->resv, acquire_ctx);
> - if (ret) {
> - ww_acquire_done(acquire_ctx);
> - return ret;
> - }
> - }
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < exec->bo_count; i++) {
> - if (i == contended_lock)
> - continue;
> -
> - bo = exec->bo[i];
> -
> - ret = dma_resv_lock_interruptible(bo->resv, acquire_ctx);
> - if (ret) {
> - int j;
> -
> - for (j = 0; j < i; j++) {
> - bo = exec->bo[j];
> - dma_resv_unlock(bo->resv);
> - }
> -
> - if (contended_lock != -1 && contended_lock >= i) {
> - bo = exec->bo[contended_lock];
> -
> - dma_resv_unlock(bo->resv);
> - }
> -
> - if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
> - contended_lock = i;
> - goto retry;
> - }
> -
> - ww_acquire_done(acquire_ctx);
> - return ret;
> - }
> - }
> -
> - ww_acquire_done(acquire_ctx);
> + int ret;
>
> /* Reserve space for our shared (read-only) fence references,
> * before we commit the CL to the hardware.
> */
> - for (i = 0; i < exec->bo_count; i++) {
> - bo = exec->bo[i];
> + drm_exec_init(exec_ctx, DRM_EXEC_INTERRUPTIBLE_WAIT, exec->bo_count);
> + drm_exec_until_all_locked(exec_ctx) {
> + ret = drm_exec_prepare_array(exec_ctx, exec->bo,
> + exec->bo_count, 1);
Hi Maíra,
So, I'm not familiar too drm_exec, but the original implementation of
vc4_lock_bo_reservations() has a retry of locks from the contention and
I don't see it inside the drm_exec_prepare_array(), why don't use the
loop drm_exec_prepare_obj() plus drm_exec_retry_on_contention() (similar
to the typical usage documented for drm_exec)?
Also, probably you already considered that: we can extend this update to
v3d, right?
Melissa
> + }
>
> - ret = dma_resv_reserve_fences(bo->resv, 1);
> - if (ret) {
> - vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(dev, exec, acquire_ctx);
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (ret) {
> + drm_exec_fini(exec_ctx);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> return 0;
> @@ -679,7 +620,7 @@ vc4_lock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
> */
> static int
> vc4_queue_submit(struct drm_device *dev, struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> - struct ww_acquire_ctx *acquire_ctx,
> + struct drm_exec *exec_ctx,
> struct drm_syncobj *out_sync)
> {
> struct vc4_dev *vc4 = to_vc4_dev(dev);
> @@ -708,7 +649,7 @@ vc4_queue_submit(struct drm_device *dev, struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
>
> vc4_update_bo_seqnos(exec, seqno);
>
> - vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(dev, exec, acquire_ctx);
> + drm_exec_fini(exec_ctx);
>
> list_add_tail(&exec->head, &vc4->bin_job_list);
>
> @@ -1123,7 +1064,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> struct drm_vc4_submit_cl *args = data;
> struct drm_syncobj *out_sync = NULL;
> struct vc4_exec_info *exec;
> - struct ww_acquire_ctx acquire_ctx;
> + struct drm_exec exec_ctx;
> struct dma_fence *in_fence;
> int ret = 0;
>
> @@ -1216,7 +1157,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> if (ret)
> goto fail;
>
> - ret = vc4_lock_bo_reservations(dev, exec, &acquire_ctx);
> + ret = vc4_lock_bo_reservations(exec, &exec_ctx);
> if (ret)
> goto fail;
>
> @@ -1224,7 +1165,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> out_sync = drm_syncobj_find(file_priv, args->out_sync);
> if (!out_sync) {
> ret = -EINVAL;
> - goto fail;
> + goto fail_unreserve;
> }
>
> /* We replace the fence in out_sync in vc4_queue_submit since
> @@ -1239,7 +1180,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> */
> exec->args = NULL;
>
> - ret = vc4_queue_submit(dev, exec, &acquire_ctx, out_sync);
> + ret = vc4_queue_submit(dev, exec, &exec_ctx, out_sync);
>
> /* The syncobj isn't part of the exec data and we need to free our
> * reference even if job submission failed.
> @@ -1248,13 +1189,15 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> drm_syncobj_put(out_sync);
>
> if (ret)
> - goto fail;
> + goto fail_unreserve;
>
> /* Return the seqno for our job. */
> args->seqno = vc4->emit_seqno;
>
> return 0;
>
> +fail_unreserve:
> + drm_exec_fini(&exec_ctx);
> fail:
> vc4_complete_exec(&vc4->base, exec);
>
> --
> 2.47.1
>
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list