[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/gt: Remove timeslice suppression

Chris Wilson chris at chris-wilson.co.uk
Wed Jan 6 16:08:40 UTC 2021


Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2021-01-06 15:57:49)
> 
> 
> On 06/01/2021 12:39, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > In the next^W future patch, we remove the strict priority system and
> > continuously re-evaluate the relative priority of tasks. As such we need
> > to enable the timeslice whenever there is more than one context in the
> > pipeline. This simplifies the decision and removes some of the tweaks to
> > suppress timeslicing, allowing us to lift the timeslice enabling to a
> > common spot at the end of running the submission tasklet.
> > 
> > One consequence of the suppression is that it was reducing fairness
> > between virtual engines on an over saturated system; undermining the
> > principle for timeslicing.
> > 
> > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/2802
> > Testcase: igt/gem_exec_balancer/fairslice
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h  |  10 -
> >   .../drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c  | 173 +++++++-----------
> >   2 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > index 430066e5884c..df62e793e747 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > @@ -238,16 +238,6 @@ struct intel_engine_execlists {
> >        */
> >       unsigned int port_mask;
> >   
> > -     /**
> > -      * @switch_priority_hint: Second context priority.
> > -      *
> > -      * We submit multiple contexts to the HW simultaneously and would
> > -      * like to occasionally switch between them to emulate timeslicing.
> > -      * To know when timeslicing is suitable, we track the priority of
> > -      * the context submitted second.
> > -      */
> > -     int switch_priority_hint;
> > -
> >       /**
> >        * @queue_priority_hint: Highest pending priority.
> >        *
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c
> > index ba3114fd4389..50d4308023f3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c
> > @@ -1143,25 +1143,6 @@ static void defer_active(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> >       defer_request(rq, i915_sched_lookup_priolist(engine, rq_prio(rq)));
> >   }
> >   
> > -static bool
> > -need_timeslice(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
> > -            const struct i915_request *rq)
> > -{
> > -     int hint;
> > -
> > -     if (!intel_engine_has_timeslices(engine))
> > -             return false;
> > -
> > -     hint = max(engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint,
> > -                virtual_prio(&engine->execlists));
> > -
> > -     if (!list_is_last(&rq->sched.link, &engine->active.requests))
> > -             hint = max(hint, rq_prio(list_next_entry(rq, sched.link)));
> > -
> > -     GEM_BUG_ON(hint >= I915_PRIORITY_UNPREEMPTABLE);
> > -     return hint >= effective_prio(rq);
> > -}
> > -
> >   static bool
> >   timeslice_yield(const struct intel_engine_execlists *el,
> >               const struct i915_request *rq)
> > @@ -1181,76 +1162,68 @@ timeslice_yield(const struct intel_engine_execlists *el,
> >       return rq->context->lrc.ccid == READ_ONCE(el->yield);
> >   }
> >   
> > -static bool
> > -timeslice_expired(const struct intel_engine_execlists *el,
> > -               const struct i915_request *rq)
> > +static bool needs_timeslice(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
> > +                         const struct i915_request *rq)
> >   {
> > +     if (!intel_engine_has_timeslices(engine))
> > +             return false;
> > +
> > +     /* If not currently active, or about to switch, wait for next event */
> > +     if (!rq || __i915_request_is_complete(rq))
> > +             return false;
> > +
> > +     /* We do not need to start the timeslice until after the ACK */
> > +     if (READ_ONCE(engine->execlists.pending[0]))
> > +             return false;
> > +
> > +     /* If ELSP[1] is occupied, always check to see if worth slicing */
> > +     if (!list_is_last_rcu(&rq->sched.link, &engine->active.requests))
> > +             return true;
> > +
> > +     /* Otherwise, ELSP[0] is by itself, but may be waiting in the queue */
> > +     if (!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&engine->execlists.queue.rb_root))
> > +             return true;
> > +
> > +     return !RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&engine->execlists.virtual.rb_root);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool
> > +timeslice_expired(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, const struct i915_request *rq)
> > +{
> > +     const struct intel_engine_execlists *el = &engine->execlists;
> > +
> > +     if (i915_request_has_nopreempt(rq) && __i915_request_has_started(rq))
> > +             return false;
> > +
> > +     if (!needs_timeslice(engine, rq))
> > +             return false;
> > +
> >       return timer_expired(&el->timer) || timeslice_yield(el, rq);
> >   }
> >   
> > -static int
> > -switch_prio(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, const struct i915_request *rq)
> > -{
> > -     if (list_is_last(&rq->sched.link, &engine->active.requests))
> > -             return engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint;
> > -
> > -     return rq_prio(list_next_entry(rq, sched.link));
> > -}
> > -
> > -static inline unsigned long
> > -timeslice(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> > +static unsigned long timeslice(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> >   {
> >       return READ_ONCE(engine->props.timeslice_duration_ms);
> >   }
> >   
> > -static unsigned long active_timeslice(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> > -{
> > -     const struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists = &engine->execlists;
> > -     const struct i915_request *rq = *execlists->active;
> > -
> > -     if (!rq || __i915_request_is_complete(rq))
> > -             return 0;
> > -
> > -     if (READ_ONCE(execlists->switch_priority_hint) < effective_prio(rq))
> > -             return 0;
> > -
> > -     return timeslice(engine);
> > -}
> > -
> > -static void set_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> > +static void start_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> >   {
> > +     struct intel_engine_execlists *el = &engine->execlists;
> >       unsigned long duration;
> >   
> > -     if (!intel_engine_has_timeslices(engine))
> > -             return;
> > +     /* Disable the timer if there is nothing to switch to */
> > +     duration = 0;
> > +     if (needs_timeslice(engine, *el->active)) {
> > +             if (el->timer.expires) {
> 
> Why not just timer_pending check? Are you sure timer->expires cannot 
> legitimately be at jiffie 0 in wrap conditions?

This is actually to test if we have set the timer or not, and avoid
extending an already active timeslice. We are abusing the jiffie wrap
being unlikely and of no great consequence (one missed timeslice/preempt
timer should be picked up by the next poke of the driver) as part of
set_timer_ms/cancel_timer.

> > +                     if (!timer_pending(&el->timer))
> > +                             tasklet_hi_schedule(&engine->execlists.tasklet);
> > +                     return;
> > +             }
> >   
> > -     duration = active_timeslice(engine);
> > -     ENGINE_TRACE(engine, "bump timeslicing, interval:%lu", duration);
> > +             duration = timeslice(engine);
> > +     }
> >   
> > -     set_timer_ms(&engine->execlists.timer, duration);
> > -}
> > -
> > -static void start_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
> > -{
> > -     struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists = &engine->execlists;
> > -     unsigned long duration;
> > -
> > -     if (!intel_engine_has_timeslices(engine))
> > -             return;
> > -
> > -     WRITE_ONCE(execlists->switch_priority_hint, prio);
> > -     if (prio == INT_MIN)
> > -             return;
> > -
> > -     if (timer_pending(&execlists->timer))
> > -             return;
> > -
> > -     duration = timeslice(engine);
> > -     ENGINE_TRACE(engine,
> > -                  "start timeslicing, prio:%d, interval:%lu",
> > -                  prio, duration);
> > -
> > -     set_timer_ms(&execlists->timer, duration);
> > +     set_timer_ms(&el->timer, duration);
> >   }
> >   
> >   static void record_preemption(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
> > @@ -1363,16 +1336,16 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> >                       __unwind_incomplete_requests(engine);
> >   
> >                       last = NULL;
> > -             } else if (need_timeslice(engine, last) &&
> > -                        timeslice_expired(execlists, last)) {
> > +             } else if (timeslice_expired(engine, last)) {
> >                       ENGINE_TRACE(engine,
> > -                                  "expired last=%llx:%lld, prio=%d, hint=%d, yield?=%s\n",
> > -                                  last->fence.context,
> > -                                  last->fence.seqno,
> > -                                  last->sched.attr.priority,
> > +                                  "expired:%s last=%llx:%lld, prio=%d, hint=%d, yield?=%s\n",
> > +                                  yesno(timer_expired(&execlists->timer)),
> > +                                  last->fence.context, last->fence.seqno,
> > +                                  rq_prio(last),
> >                                    execlists->queue_priority_hint,
> >                                    yesno(timeslice_yield(execlists, last)));
> >   
> > +                     cancel_timer(&execlists->timer);
> 
> What is this cancel for?

This branch is taken upon yielding the timeslice, but we may not submit
a new pair of contexts, leaving the timer active (and marked as
expired). Since the timer remains expired, we will continuously looped
until a context switch, or some other preemption event.
-Chris


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list