[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/execlists: Pull tasklet interrupt-bh local to direct submission

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-03-24 16:04:47)
> 
> On 24/03/2020 12:07, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > We dropped calling process_csb prior to handling direct submission in
> > order to avoid the nesting of spinlocks and lift process_csb() and the
> > majority of the tasklet out of irq-off. However, we do want to avoid
> > ksoftirqd latency in the fast path, so try and pull the interrupt-bh
> > local to direct submission if we can acquire the tasklet's lock.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 6 ++++++
> >   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> > index 210f60e14ef4..82dee2141b46 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> > @@ -2891,6 +2891,12 @@ static void __submit_queue_imm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> >       if (reset_in_progress(execlists))
> >               return; /* defer until we restart the engine following reset */
> >   
> > +     /* Hopefully we clear execlists->pending[] to let us through */
> > +     if (execlists->pending[0] && tasklet_trylock(&execlists->tasklet))
> 
> Does access to pending needs a READ_ONCE?

Yes, we are peeking outside of the tasklet.

>   {
> > +             process_csb(engine);
> > +             tasklet_unlock(&execlists->tasklet);
> > +     }
> > +
> >       __execlists_submission_tasklet(engine);
> >   }
> >   
> > 
> 
> __execlists_submission_tasklet does check with READ_ONCE.
> 
> I think locking is fine, given how normal flow is tasklet -> irqsave 
> engine lock, and here we have the reverse, but a trylock.

And inside process_csb() we don't take the active lock, so we just need
to serialise calls to process_csb(). We don't strictly rely on it as
it's just an optimisation for latency so we can trylock and not worry
about not making forward progress -- the tasklet *running* but waiting
on the execlists lock is sufficient to ensure that a dequeue will happen
after this point if we can't do it ourselves.
-Chris