[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Mitigate retirement starvation a bit
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Thu Feb 4 13:30:30 UTC 2016
On 04/02/16 12:40, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 12:25:24PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> In execlists mode internal house keeping of the discarded
>> requests (and so contexts and VMAs) relies solely on the retire
>> worker, which can be prevented from running by just being
>> unlucky when busy clients are hammering on the big lock.
>>
>> Prime example is the gem_close_race IGT, which due to this
>> effect causes internal lists to grow to epic proportions, with
>> a consequece of object VMA traversal to growing exponentially
>> and resulting in tens of minutes test runtime. Memory use is
>> also very high and a limiting factor on some platforms.
>>
>> Since we do not want to run this internal house keeping more
>> frequently, due concerns that it may affect performance, and
>> the scenario being statistically not very likely in real
>> workloads, one possible workaround is to run it when new
>> client handles are opened.
>>
>> This will solve the issues with this particular test case,
>> making it complete in tens of seconds instead of tens of
>> minutes, and will not add any run-time penalty to running
>> clients.
>>
>> It can only slightly slow down new client startup, but on a
>> realisticaly loaded system we are expecting this to be not
>> significant. Even with heavy rendering in progress we can have
>> perhaps up to several thousands of requests pending retirement,
>> which, with a typical retirement cost of 80ns to 1us per
>> request, is not significant.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>> Testcase: igt/gem_close_race/gem-close-race
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Still doesn't fix actual workloads where this is demonstrably bad, which
> can be demonstrated with a single fd.
Which are those?
> The most effective treatment I found is moving the retire-requests from
> execbuf (which exists for similar reasons) to get-pages.
>
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ickle/linux-2.6/commit/?h=breadcrumbs&id=75f4e53f1c9141ba2dd8847396a1bcc8dbeecd55
I struggle to understand how it is OK to stall get pages or even the
object close when you objected to those in the past?
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list