[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 02/22] drm/i915/gtt: Serialise both updates to PDE and our shadow
Matthew Auld
matthew.auld at intel.com
Mon Jun 17 10:36:36 UTC 2019
On 17/06/2019 08:18, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Currently, we perform a locked update of the shadow entry when
> allocating a page directory entry such that if two clients are
> concurrently allocating neighbouring ranges we only insert one new entry
> for the pair of them. However, we also need to serialise both clients
> wrt to the actual entry in the HW table, or else we may allow one client
> or even a third client to proceed ahead of the HW write. My handwave
> before was that under the _pathological_ condition we would see the
> scratch entry instead of the expected entry, causing a temporary
> glitch. That starvation condition will eventually show up in practice, so
> fix it.
>
> The reason for the previous cheat was to avoid having to free the extra
> allocation while under the spinlock. Now, we keep the extra entry
> allocated until the end instead.
>
> Fixes: 1d1b5490b91c ("drm/i915/gtt: Replace struct_mutex serialisation for allocation")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at intel.com>
> ---
[snip]
>
> static int gen8_preallocate_top_level_pdp(struct i915_ppgtt *ppgtt)
> @@ -1819,11 +1831,13 @@ static int gen6_alloc_va_range(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> u64 start, u64 length)
> {
> struct gen6_ppgtt *ppgtt = to_gen6_ppgtt(i915_vm_to_ppgtt(vm));
> + struct i915_page_table *alloc = NULL;
> struct i915_page_table *pt;
> intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
> u64 from = start;
> unsigned int pde;
> bool flush = false;
> + int ret;
ret = 0;
>
> wakeref = intel_runtime_pm_get(&vm->i915->runtime_pm);
>
> @@ -1832,19 +1846,18 @@ static int gen6_alloc_va_range(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> const unsigned int count = gen6_pte_count(start, length);
>
> if (pt == vm->scratch_pt) {
> - struct i915_page_table *old;
> -
> spin_unlock(&ppgtt->base.pd.lock);
>
> - pt = alloc_pt(vm);
> + pt = alloc;
We have to reset this, no?
> + if (!pt)
> + pt = alloc_pt(vm);
> if (IS_ERR(pt))
> goto unwind_out;
ret = PTR_ERR();
>
> gen6_initialize_pt(vm, pt);
>
> - old = cmpxchg(&ppgtt->base.pd.page_table[pde],
> - vm->scratch_pt, pt);
> - if (old == vm->scratch_pt) {
> + spin_lock(&ppgtt->base.pd.lock);
> + if (ppgtt->base.pd.page_table[pde] == vm->scratch_pt) {
> ppgtt->base.pd.page_table[pde] = pt;
> if (i915_vma_is_bound(ppgtt->vma,
> I915_VMA_GLOBAL_BIND)) {
> @@ -1852,11 +1865,9 @@ static int gen6_alloc_va_range(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> flush = true;
> }
> } else {
> - free_pt(vm, pt);
> - pt = old;
> + alloc = pt;
> + pt = ppgtt->base.pd.page_table[pde];
> }
> -
> - spin_lock(&ppgtt->base.pd.lock);
> }
>
> atomic_add(count, &pt->used_ptes);
> @@ -1868,14 +1879,15 @@ static int gen6_alloc_va_range(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> gen6_ggtt_invalidate(vm->i915);
> }
>
> - intel_runtime_pm_put(&vm->i915->runtime_pm, wakeref);
> -
> - return 0;
> + goto out;
>
> unwind_out:
> - intel_runtime_pm_put(&vm->i915->runtime_pm, wakeref);
> gen6_ppgtt_clear_range(vm, from, start - from);
> - return -ENOMEM;
> +out:
> + if (alloc)
> + free_pt(vm, alloc);
> + intel_runtime_pm_put(&vm->i915->runtime_pm, wakeref);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> static int gen6_ppgtt_init_scratch(struct gen6_ppgtt *ppgtt)
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list