[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/16] drm/i915: Don't set queue_priority_hint if we don't kick the submission

[Mika Kuoppala]

Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:

> If we change the priority of the active context, then it has no impact
> on the decision of whether to preempt the active context -- we don't
> preempt the context with itself. In this situation, we elide the tasklet
> rescheduling and should *not* be marking up the queue_priority_hint as
> that may mask a later submission where we decide we don't have to kick
> the tasklet as a higher priority submission is pending (spoiler alert,
> it was not).
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
> index 0ca40f6bf08c..d2edb527dcb8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
> @@ -189,22 +189,34 @@ static inline bool need_preempt(int prio, int active)
>  	return prio >= max(I915_PRIORITY_NORMAL, active);
>  }
>  
> -static void kick_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
> +static void kick_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
> +			    const struct i915_request *rq,
> +			    int prio)
>  {
> -	const struct i915_request *inflight =
> -		execlists_active(&engine->execlists);
> +	const struct i915_request *inflight;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We only need to kick the tasklet once for the high priority
> +	 * new context we add into the queue.
> +	 */
> +	if (prio <= engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint)
> +		return;
> +
> +	/* Nothing currently active? We're overdue for a submission! */
> +	inflight = execlists_active(&engine->execlists);
> +	if (!inflight)
> +		return;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * If we are already the currently executing context, don't
> -	 * bother evaluating if we should preempt ourselves, or if
> -	 * we expect nothing to change as a result of running the
> -	 * tasklet, i.e. we have not change the priority queue
> -	 * sufficiently to oust the running context.
> +	 * bother evaluating if we should preempt ourselves.
>  	 */
> -	if (!inflight || !need_preempt(prio, rq_prio(inflight)))
> +	if (inflight->hw_context == rq->hw_context)

If there is a tail update at this moment, does the hardware
take it into account or do we need to kick?

-Mika


>  		return;
>  
> -	tasklet_hi_schedule(&engine->execlists.tasklet);
> +	engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint = prio;
> +	if (need_preempt(prio, rq_prio(inflight)))
> +		tasklet_hi_schedule(&engine->execlists.tasklet);
>  }
>  
>  static void __i915_schedule(struct i915_sched_node *node,
> @@ -330,13 +342,8 @@ static void __i915_schedule(struct i915_sched_node *node,
>  			list_move_tail(&node->link, cache.priolist);
>  		}
>  
> -		if (prio <= engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint)
> -			continue;
> -
> -		engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint = prio;
> -
>  		/* Defer (tasklet) submission until after all of our updates. */
> -		kick_submission(engine, prio);
> +		kick_submission(engine, node_to_request(node), prio);
>  	}
>  
>  	spin_unlock(&engine->active.lock);
> -- 
> 2.24.0.rc0