[Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 05/42] drm/i915/region: support basic eviction
Matthew Auld
matthew.william.auld at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 14:58:31 UTC 2019
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 15:25, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Quoting Matthew Auld (2019-02-14 14:57:03)
> > Support basic eviction for regions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue at linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 16 ++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_object.h | 7 ++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_shrinker.c | 59 ++++++++++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_memory_region.c | 40 +++++++++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_memory_region.h | 7 ++
> > .../drm/i915/selftests/intel_memory_region.c | 76 +++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/mock_region.c | 1 +
> > 8 files changed, 204 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > index 0bea7d889284..3df27769b978 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> > @@ -3196,6 +3196,8 @@ void i915_gem_shrinker_register(struct drm_i915_private *i915);
> > void i915_gem_shrinker_unregister(struct drm_i915_private *i915);
> > void i915_gem_shrinker_taints_mutex(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> > struct mutex *mutex);
> > +int i915_gem_shrink_memory_region(struct intel_memory_region *mem,
> > + resource_size_t target);
> >
> > /* i915_gem_tiling.c */
> > static inline bool i915_gem_object_needs_bit17_swizzle(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > index 92768ab294a4..7f044b643a75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > @@ -4095,6 +4095,22 @@ i915_gem_madvise_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > !i915_gem_object_has_pages(obj))
> > i915_gem_object_truncate(obj);
> >
> > + if (obj->memory_region) {
> > + mutex_lock(&obj->memory_region->obj_lock);
> > +
> > + switch (obj->mm.madv) {
> > + case I915_MADV_WILLNEED:
> > + list_move(&obj->region_link, &obj->memory_region->objects);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + list_move(&obj->region_link,
> > + &obj->memory_region->purgeable);
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + mutex_unlock(&obj->memory_region->obj_lock);
> > + }
> > +
> > args->retained = obj->mm.madv != __I915_MADV_PURGED;
> > mutex_unlock(&obj->mm.lock);
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_object.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_object.h
> > index ac52f61e8ad1..76947a6f49f1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_object.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_object.h
> > @@ -95,6 +95,13 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_object {
> > * List of memory region blocks allocated for this object.
> > */
> > struct list_head blocks;
> > + /**
> > + * Element within memory_region->objects or memory_region->purgeable if
> > + * the object is marked as DONTNEED. Access is protected by
> > + * memory_region->obj_lock.
>
> Lies. ;-p
>
> > + */
> > + struct list_head region_link;
> > + struct list_head tmp_link;
> >
> > struct {
> > /**
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_shrinker.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_shrinker.c
> > index 6da795c7e62e..713c6c93cf30 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_shrinker.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_shrinker.c
> > @@ -308,6 +308,65 @@ unsigned long i915_gem_shrink_all(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> > return freed;
> > }
> >
> > +int i915_gem_shrink_memory_region(struct intel_memory_region *mem,
> > + resource_size_t target)
>
> If it's not going to be coupled into the mm.shrinker callback, do not put
> it here! And there's no reason why we would ever couple local memory to
> the generic mm shrinker!
Yup.
>
> > +{
> > + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = mem->i915;
> > + struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, *on;
> > + resource_size_t found;
> > + LIST_HEAD(purgeable);
> > + bool unlock;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (!shrinker_lock(i915, 0, &unlock))
> > + return 0;
>
> Don't...
>
> > +
> > + i915_retire_requests(i915);
>
> And this, don't do this.
>
> > + err = 0;
> > + found = 0;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&mem->obj_lock);
>
> That's all the top-level locking we should ever need.
>
> > + list_for_each_entry(obj, &mem->purgeable, region_link) {
> > + if (!i915_gem_object_has_pages(obj))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + if (READ_ONCE(obj->pin_global))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + if (atomic_read(&obj->mm.pages_pin_count) > obj->bind_count)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + list_add(&obj->tmp_link, &purgeable);
>
> Oh crikey.
What's the crikey for? We do the purging in two passes? Yeah, I guess
that's kinda garbage. There is definitely some leftover baggage from
when we did "interesting" things in here, which needs to be fixed up.
>
> > +
> > + found += obj->base.size;
> > + if (found >= target)
> > + goto found;
> > + }
> > +
> > + err = -ENOSPC;
> > +found:
> > + mutex_unlock(&mem->obj_lock);
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(obj, on, &purgeable, tmp_link) {
> > + if (!err)
> > + err = i915_gem_object_unbind(obj);
>
> I would advise not to worry about unbinding until you have it decoupled
> from struct_mutex. Or at least defer struct_mutex until you truly need
> it to access the vma, so that it doesn't get abused for anything else.
Ok, I'll just drop the unbind, and kiss for now.
>
> > + if (!err) {
> > + __i915_gem_object_put_pages(obj,
> > + I915_MM_SHRINKER);
> > + if (!i915_gem_object_has_pages(obj))
> > + obj->mm.madv = __I915_MADV_PURGED;
>
> But this is racy.
>
> > + }
> > +
> > + list_del(&obj->tmp_link);
>
> I'm still going crikey. That's no excuse to invoke struct_mutex.
> -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list