[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915/userptr: Flush cancellations before mmu-notifier invalidate returns
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Tue Apr 5 12:05:05 UTC 2016
On 03/04/16 18:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
> In order to ensure that all invalidations are completed before the
> operation returns to userspace (i.e. before the mmap() syscall returns)
> we need to flush the outstanding operations. To this end, we submit all
> the per-object invalidation work to a private workqueue and then flush
> the workqueue at the end of the function. We are allowed to block inside
> invalidate_range_start, and struct_mutex is the inner lock so the worker
> is not hiding any lock inversions. The advantage of using the workqueue
> over direct calling of cancel_userptr() is that it allows us to
> parallelise the potential waits and unpinning of large objects.
There was no direct calling, but running it from a shared wq which is
now private, per task->mm.
But it sounds so obvious now that the mmu notifier needs to wait for
cancel_userptr workers to complete that I wonder how we missed that
until now.
I would also spell out the two new bits explicitly in the commit:
waiting for workers and waiting on rendering.
With some more description for the latter - why it is needed?
i915_vma_unbind would be doing a flavour of waiting already.
Otherwise I did not find any issues with the code itself, just these
high level questions.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94699
> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/sync-unmap-cycles
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 291a9393493d..92b39186b05a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ struct i915_mmu_notifier {
> struct hlist_node node;
> struct mmu_notifier mn;
> struct rb_root objects;
> + struct workqueue_struct *wq;
> };
>
> struct i915_mmu_object {
> @@ -60,6 +61,40 @@ struct i915_mmu_object {
> bool attached;
> };
>
> +static void wait_rendering(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> +{
> + struct drm_device *dev = obj->base.dev;
> + struct drm_i915_gem_request *requests[I915_NUM_ENGINES];
> + unsigned reset_counter;
> + int i, n;
> +
> + if (!obj->active)
> + return;
> +
> + n = 0;
> + for (i = 0; i < I915_NUM_ENGINES; i++) {
> + struct drm_i915_gem_request *req;
> +
> + req = obj->last_read_req[i];
> + if (req == NULL)
> + continue;
> +
> + requests[n++] = i915_gem_request_reference(req);
> + }
> +
> + reset_counter = atomic_read(&to_i915(dev)->gpu_error.reset_counter);
> + mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> + __i915_wait_request(requests[i], reset_counter, false,
> + NULL, NULL);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> + i915_gem_request_unreference(requests[i]);
> +}
> +
> static void cancel_userptr(struct work_struct *work)
> {
> struct i915_mmu_object *mo = container_of(work, typeof(*mo), work);
> @@ -75,6 +110,8 @@ static void cancel_userptr(struct work_struct *work)
> struct i915_vma *vma, *tmp;
> bool was_interruptible;
>
> + wait_rendering(obj);
> +
> was_interruptible = dev_priv->mm.interruptible;
> dev_priv->mm.interruptible = false;
>
> @@ -140,7 +177,7 @@ static void i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *_mn,
> */
> mo = container_of(it, struct i915_mmu_object, it);
> if (kref_get_unless_zero(&mo->obj->base.refcount))
> - schedule_work(&mo->work);
> + queue_work(mn->wq, &mo->work);
>
> list_add(&mo->link, &cancelled);
> it = interval_tree_iter_next(it, start, end);
> @@ -148,6 +185,8 @@ static void i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *_mn,
> list_for_each_entry(mo, &cancelled, link)
> del_object(mo);
> spin_unlock(&mn->lock);
> +
> + flush_workqueue(mn->wq);
> }
>
> static const struct mmu_notifier_ops i915_gem_userptr_notifier = {
> @@ -167,10 +206,16 @@ i915_mmu_notifier_create(struct mm_struct *mm)
> spin_lock_init(&mn->lock);
> mn->mn.ops = &i915_gem_userptr_notifier;
> mn->objects = RB_ROOT;
> + mn->wq = alloc_workqueue("i915-userptr-release", WQ_UNBOUND, 0);
> + if (mn->wq == NULL) {
> + kfree(mn);
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> + }
>
> /* Protected by mmap_sem (write-lock) */
> ret = __mmu_notifier_register(&mn->mn, mm);
> if (ret) {
> + destroy_workqueue(mn->wq);
> kfree(mn);
> return ERR_PTR(ret);
> }
> @@ -256,6 +301,7 @@ i915_mmu_notifier_free(struct i915_mmu_notifier *mn,
> return;
>
> mmu_notifier_unregister(&mn->mn, mm);
> + destroy_workqueue(mn->wq);
> kfree(mn);
> }
>
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list