[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/gvt: Introduce per object locking in GVT scheduler.
Colin Xu
Colin.Xu at intel.com
Wed Sep 9 01:43:21 UTC 2020
I tested this patch on the suspend/resume case with vGPU created (no
need really activate), can still observer the system freeze issue as
mentioned in another patch I sent. So I suppose we still need decouple
context pin/unpin with submission setup/clean, but move to workload
create/destroy?
After made similar changes based on this one, plus the suspend/resume
support patch, below tests can pass:
- Create vGPU then suspend/resume.
- Run VM w/ vGPU then suspend/resume.
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gvt-dev/2020-September/007061.html
On 2020-09-08 04:02, Zhi Wang wrote:
> To support ww locking and per-object implemented in i915, GVT scheduler needs
> to be refined. Most of the changes are located in shadow batch buffer, shadow
> wa context in GVT-g, where use quite a lot of i915 gem object APIs.
>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw at linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/scheduler.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/scheduler.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/scheduler.c
> index 1570eb8..fe7ee10 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/scheduler.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/scheduler.c
> @@ -396,7 +396,9 @@ static void release_shadow_wa_ctx(struct intel_shadow_wa_ctx *wa_ctx)
> if (!wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj)
> return;
>
> + i915_gem_object_lock(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj, NULL);
> i915_gem_object_unpin_map(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj);
> + i915_gem_object_unlock(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj);
> i915_gem_object_put(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj);
>
> wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj = NULL;
> @@ -504,6 +506,7 @@ static int prepare_shadow_batch_buffer(struct intel_vgpu_workload *workload)
> struct intel_gvt *gvt = workload->vgpu->gvt;
> const int gmadr_bytes = gvt->device_info.gmadr_bytes_in_cmd;
> struct intel_vgpu_shadow_bb *bb;
> + struct i915_gem_ww_ctx ww;
> int ret;
>
> list_for_each_entry(bb, &workload->shadow_bb, list) {
> @@ -528,10 +531,19 @@ static int prepare_shadow_batch_buffer(struct intel_vgpu_workload *workload)
> * directly
> */
> if (!bb->ppgtt) {
> - bb->vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin(bb->obj,
> - NULL, 0, 0, 0);
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(&ww, false);
> +retry:
> + i915_gem_object_lock(bb->obj, &ww);
> +
> + bb->vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww(bb->obj, &ww,
> + NULL, 0, 0, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(bb->vma)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(bb->vma);
> + if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
> + ret = i915_gem_ww_ctx_backoff(&ww);
> + if (!ret)
> + goto retry;
> + }
> goto err;
> }
>
> @@ -545,13 +557,18 @@ static int prepare_shadow_batch_buffer(struct intel_vgpu_workload *workload)
> 0);
> if (ret)
> goto err;
> +
> + /* No one is going to touch shadow bb from now on. */
> + i915_gem_object_flush_map(bb->obj);
> +
> + i915_gem_object_unlock(bb->obj);
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(&ww);
> }
>
> - /* No one is going to touch shadow bb from now on. */
> - i915_gem_object_flush_map(bb->obj);
> }
> return 0;
> err:
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(&ww);
> release_shadow_batch_buffer(workload);
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -578,14 +595,30 @@ static int prepare_shadow_wa_ctx(struct intel_shadow_wa_ctx *wa_ctx)
> unsigned char *per_ctx_va =
> (unsigned char *)wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.shadow_va +
> wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.size;
> + struct i915_gem_ww_ctx ww;
> + int ret;
>
> if (wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.size == 0)
> return 0;
>
> - vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj, NULL,
> - 0, CACHELINE_BYTES, 0);
> - if (IS_ERR(vma))
> - return PTR_ERR(vma);
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(&ww, false);
> +retry:
> + i915_gem_object_lock(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj, &ww);
> +
> + vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj, &ww, NULL,
> + 0, CACHELINE_BYTES, 0);
> + if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(vma);
> + if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
> + ret = i915_gem_ww_ctx_backoff(&ww);
> + if (!ret)
> + goto retry;
> + }
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + i915_gem_object_unlock(wa_ctx->indirect_ctx.obj);
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(&ww);
>
> /* FIXME: we are not tracking our pinned VMA leaving it
> * up to the core to fix up the stray pin_count upon
> @@ -619,12 +652,14 @@ static void release_shadow_batch_buffer(struct intel_vgpu_workload *workload)
>
> list_for_each_entry_safe(bb, pos, &workload->shadow_bb, list) {
> if (bb->obj) {
> + i915_gem_object_lock(bb->obj, NULL);
> if (bb->va && !IS_ERR(bb->va))
> i915_gem_object_unpin_map(bb->obj);
>
> if (bb->vma && !IS_ERR(bb->vma))
> i915_vma_unpin(bb->vma);
>
> + i915_gem_object_unlock(bb->obj);
> i915_gem_object_put(bb->obj);
> }
> list_del(&bb->list);
> @@ -1337,6 +1372,7 @@ int intel_vgpu_setup_submission(struct intel_vgpu *vgpu)
> struct intel_vgpu_submission *s = &vgpu->submission;
> struct intel_engine_cs *engine;
> struct i915_ppgtt *ppgtt;
> + struct i915_gem_ww_ctx ww;
> enum intel_engine_id i;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -1368,11 +1404,20 @@ int intel_vgpu_setup_submission(struct intel_vgpu *vgpu)
>
> ce->ring = __intel_context_ring_size(ring_size);
> }
Cut here
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(&ww, false);
> +retry:
> + ret = intel_context_pin_ww(ce, &ww);
> + if (ret) {
> + if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
> + ret = i915_gem_ww_ctx_backoff(&ww);
> + if (!ret)
> + goto retry;
> + }
> + goto out_shadow_ctx;
> + }
I move the piece to create_workload. Similar to the change I made in my
patch sent.
>
> - ret = intel_context_pin(ce);
> intel_context_put(ce);
> - if (ret)
> - goto out_shadow_ctx;
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(&ww);
>
> s->shadow[i] = ce;
> }
> @@ -1400,6 +1445,7 @@ int intel_vgpu_setup_submission(struct intel_vgpu *vgpu)
> return 0;
>
> out_shadow_ctx:
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(&ww);
> i915_context_ppgtt_root_restore(s, ppgtt);
> for_each_engine(engine, vgpu->gvt->gt, i) {
> if (IS_ERR(s->shadow[i]))
--
Best Regards,
Colin Xu
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list