[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 12/17] drm/i915: Add locking to i915_gem_evict_vm()
Matthew Auld
matthew.william.auld at gmail.com
Fri Dec 17 13:19:27 UTC 2021
On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 at 14:28, Maarten Lankhorst
<maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> i915_gem_evict_vm will need to be able to evict objects that are
> locked by the current ctx. By testing if the current context already
> locked the object, we can do this correctly. This allows us to
> evict the entire vm even if we already hold some objects' locks.
>
> Previously, this was spread over several commits, but it makes
> more sense to commit the changes to i915_gem_evict_vm separately
> from the changes to i915_gem_evict_something() and
> i915_gem_evict_for_node().
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 2 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_mman.c | 2 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 3 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c | 7 ++++-
> .../gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_gem_evict.c | 10 +++++--
> 6 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> index 2213f7b613da..eb3649e844ff 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -766,7 +766,7 @@ static int eb_reserve(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> case 1:
> /* Too fragmented, unbind everything and retry */
> mutex_lock(&eb->context->vm->mutex);
> - err = i915_gem_evict_vm(eb->context->vm);
> + err = i915_gem_evict_vm(eb->context->vm, &eb->ww);
> mutex_unlock(&eb->context->vm->mutex);
> if (err)
> return err;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_mman.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_mman.c
> index 00cd9642669a..2856098cb449 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_mman.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_mman.c
> @@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ static vm_fault_t vm_fault_gtt(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> if (vma == ERR_PTR(-ENOSPC)) {
> ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&ggtt->vm.mutex);
> if (!ret) {
> - ret = i915_gem_evict_vm(&ggtt->vm);
> + ret = i915_gem_evict_vm(&ggtt->vm, &ww);
> mutex_unlock(&ggtt->vm.mutex);
> }
> if (ret)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index d51628d10f9d..c180019c607f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -1725,7 +1725,8 @@ int __must_check i915_gem_evict_something(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> int __must_check i915_gem_evict_for_node(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> struct drm_mm_node *node,
> unsigned int flags);
> -int i915_gem_evict_vm(struct i915_address_space *vm);
> +int i915_gem_evict_vm(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> + struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ww);
>
> /* i915_gem_internal.c */
> struct drm_i915_gem_object *
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c
> index 2b73ddb11c66..bfd66f539fc1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c
> @@ -367,7 +367,7 @@ int i915_gem_evict_for_node(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> * To clarify: This is for freeing up virtual address space, not for freeing
> * memory in e.g. the shrinker.
> */
> -int i915_gem_evict_vm(struct i915_address_space *vm)
> +int i915_gem_evict_vm(struct i915_address_space *vm, struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ww)
> {
> int ret = 0;
>
> @@ -388,24 +388,50 @@ int i915_gem_evict_vm(struct i915_address_space *vm)
> do {
> struct i915_vma *vma, *vn;
> LIST_HEAD(eviction_list);
> + LIST_HEAD(locked_eviction_list);
>
> list_for_each_entry(vma, &vm->bound_list, vm_link) {
> if (i915_vma_is_pinned(vma))
> continue;
>
> + /*
> + * If we already own the lock, trylock fails. In case the resv
> + * is shared among multiple objects, we still need the object ref.
What is "object ref" here? I assume it's just leftovers...
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> + */
> + if (ww && (dma_resv_locking_ctx(vma->obj->base.resv) == &ww->ctx)) {
> + __i915_vma_pin(vma);
> + list_add(&vma->evict_link, &locked_eviction_list);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + if (!i915_gem_object_trylock(vma->obj, ww))
> + continue;
> +
> __i915_vma_pin(vma);
> list_add(&vma->evict_link, &eviction_list);
> }
> - if (list_empty(&eviction_list))
> + if (list_empty(&eviction_list) && list_empty(&locked_eviction_list))
> break;
>
> ret = 0;
> + /* Unbind locked objects first, before unlocking the eviction_list */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(vma, vn, &locked_eviction_list, evict_link) {
> + __i915_vma_unpin(vma);
> +
> + if (ret == 0)
> + ret = __i915_vma_unbind(vma);
> + if (ret != -EINTR) /* "Get me out of here!" */
> + ret = 0;
> + }
> +
> list_for_each_entry_safe(vma, vn, &eviction_list, evict_link) {
> __i915_vma_unpin(vma);
> if (ret == 0)
> ret = __i915_vma_unbind(vma);
> if (ret != -EINTR) /* "Get me out of here!" */
> ret = 0;
> +
> + i915_gem_object_unlock(vma->obj);
> }
> } while (ret == 0);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c
> index de24e4b3b19b..d24e90eac948 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c
> @@ -1462,7 +1462,12 @@ static int __i915_ggtt_pin(struct i915_vma *vma, struct i915_gem_ww_ctx *ww,
> /* Unlike i915_vma_pin, we don't take no for an answer! */
> flush_idle_contexts(vm->gt);
> if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&vm->mutex) == 0) {
> - i915_gem_evict_vm(vm);
> + /*
> + * We pass NULL ww here, as we don't want to unbind
> + * locked objects when called from execbuf when pinning
> + * is removed. This would probably regress badly.
> + */
> + i915_gem_evict_vm(vm, NULL);
> mutex_unlock(&vm->mutex);
> }
> } while (1);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_gem_evict.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_gem_evict.c
> index 7e0658a77659..7178811366af 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_gem_evict.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_gem_evict.c
> @@ -331,6 +331,7 @@ static int igt_evict_vm(void *arg)
> {
> struct intel_gt *gt = arg;
> struct i915_ggtt *ggtt = gt->ggtt;
> + struct i915_gem_ww_ctx ww;
> LIST_HEAD(objects);
> int err;
>
> @@ -342,7 +343,7 @@ static int igt_evict_vm(void *arg)
>
> /* Everything is pinned, nothing should happen */
> mutex_lock(&ggtt->vm.mutex);
> - err = i915_gem_evict_vm(&ggtt->vm);
> + err = i915_gem_evict_vm(&ggtt->vm, NULL);
> mutex_unlock(&ggtt->vm.mutex);
> if (err) {
> pr_err("i915_gem_evict_vm on a full GGTT returned err=%d]\n",
> @@ -352,9 +353,14 @@ static int igt_evict_vm(void *arg)
>
> unpin_ggtt(ggtt);
>
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_init(&ww, false);
> mutex_lock(&ggtt->vm.mutex);
> - err = i915_gem_evict_vm(&ggtt->vm);
> + err = i915_gem_evict_vm(&ggtt->vm, &ww);
> mutex_unlock(&ggtt->vm.mutex);
> +
> + /* no -EDEADLK handling; can't happen with vm.mutex in place */
> + i915_gem_ww_ctx_fini(&ww);
> +
> if (err) {
> pr_err("i915_gem_evict_vm on a full GGTT returned err=%d]\n",
> err);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list