[Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 36/97] drm/i915/guc: Add non blocking CTB send function
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Thu May 27 10:02:24 UTC 2021
On 26/05/2021 19:10, Matthew Brost wrote:
[snip]
>>>>> +static int ct_send_nb(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>>>>> + const u32 *action,
>>>>> + u32 len,
>>>>> + u32 flags)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct intel_guc_ct_buffer *ctb = &ct->ctbs.send;
>>>>> + unsigned long spin_flags;
>>>>> + u32 fence;
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&ctb->lock, spin_flags);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + ret = ctb_has_room(ctb, len + 1);
>>>>> + if (unlikely(ret))
>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + fence = ct_get_next_fence(ct);
>>>>> + ret = ct_write(ct, action, len, fence, flags);
>>>>> + if (unlikely(ret))
>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + intel_guc_notify(ct_to_guc(ct));
>>>>> +
>>>>> +out:
>>>>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ctb->lock, spin_flags);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>>>>> const u32 *action,
>>>>> u32 len,
>>>>> @@ -473,6 +541,7 @@ static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>>>>> u32 response_buf_size,
>>>>> u32 *status)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + struct intel_guc_ct_buffer *ctb = &ct->ctbs.send;
>>>>> struct ct_request request;
>>>>> unsigned long flags;
>>>>> u32 fence;
>>>>> @@ -482,8 +551,20 @@ static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>>>>> GEM_BUG_ON(!len);
>>>>> GEM_BUG_ON(len & ~GUC_CT_MSG_LEN_MASK);
>>>>> GEM_BUG_ON(!response_buf && response_buf_size);
>>>>> + might_sleep();
>>>>
>>>> Sleep is just cond_resched below or there is more?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, the cond_resched.
>>>
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * We use a lazy spin wait loop here as we believe that if the CT
>>>>> + * buffers are sized correctly the flow control condition should be
>>>>> + * rare.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +retry:
>>>>> spin_lock_irqsave(&ct->ctbs.send.lock, flags);
>>>>> + if (unlikely(!ctb_has_room(ctb, len + 1))) {
>>>>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ct->ctbs.send.lock, flags);
>>>>> + cond_resched();
>>>>> + goto retry;
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> If this patch is about adding a non-blocking send function, and below we can
>>>> see that it creates a fork:
>>>>
>>>> intel_guc_ct_send:
>>>> ...
>>>> if (flags & INTEL_GUC_SEND_NB)
>>>> return ct_send_nb(ct, action, len, flags);
>>>>
>>>> ret = ct_send(ct, action, len, response_buf, response_buf_size, &status);
>>>>
>>>> Then why is there a change in ct_send here, which is not the new
>>>> non-blocking path?
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is not a change to ct_send(), just to intel_guc_ct_send.
>>
>> I was doing by the diff which says:
>>
>> static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>> const u32 *action,
>> u32 len,
>> @@ -473,6 +541,7 @@ static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>> u32 response_buf_size,
>> u32 *status)
>> {
>> + struct intel_guc_ct_buffer *ctb = &ct->ctbs.send;
>> struct ct_request request;
>> unsigned long flags;
>> u32 fence;
>> @@ -482,8 +551,20 @@ static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>> GEM_BUG_ON(!len);
>> GEM_BUG_ON(len & ~GUC_CT_MSG_LEN_MASK);
>> GEM_BUG_ON(!response_buf && response_buf_size);
>> + might_sleep();
>> + /*
>> + * We use a lazy spin wait loop here as we believe that if the CT
>> + * buffers are sized correctly the flow control condition should be
>> + * rare.
>> + */
>> +retry:
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&ct->ctbs.send.lock, flags);
>> + if (unlikely(!ctb_has_room(ctb, len + 1))) {
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ct->ctbs.send.lock, flags);
>> + cond_resched();
>> + goto retry;
>> + }
>>
>> So it looks like a change to ct_send to me. Is that wrong?
What about this part - is the patch changing the blocking ct_send or
not, and if it is why?
Regards,
Tvrtko
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tvrtko
>>
>>> As for why intel_guc_ct_send is updated and we don't just a new public
>>> function, this was another reviewers suggestion. Again can't make
>>> everyone happy.
>>>>> fence = ct_get_next_fence(ct);
>>>>> request.fence = fence;
>>>>> @@ -495,7 +576,7 @@ static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>>>>> list_add_tail(&request.link, &ct->requests.pending);
>>>>> spin_unlock(&ct->requests.lock);
>>>>> - err = ct_write(ct, action, len, fence);
>>>>> + err = ct_write(ct, action, len, fence, 0);
>>>>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ct->ctbs.send.lock, flags);
>>>>> @@ -537,7 +618,7 @@ static int ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct,
>>>>> * Command Transport (CT) buffer based GuC send function.
>>>>> */
>>>>> int intel_guc_ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct, const u32 *action, u32 len,
>>>>> - u32 *response_buf, u32 response_buf_size)
>>>>> + u32 *response_buf, u32 response_buf_size, u32 flags)
>>>>> {
>>>>> u32 status = ~0; /* undefined */
>>>>> int ret;
>>>>> @@ -547,6 +628,9 @@ int intel_guc_ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct, const u32 *action, u32 len,
>>>>> return -ENODEV;
>>>>> }
>>>>> + if (flags & INTEL_GUC_SEND_NB)
>>>>> + return ct_send_nb(ct, action, len, flags);
>>>>> +
>>>>> ret = ct_send(ct, action, len, response_buf, response_buf_size, &status);
>>>>> if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
>>>>> CT_ERROR(ct, "Sending action %#x failed (err=%d status=%#X)\n",
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_ct.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_ct.h
>>>>> index 1ae2dde6db93..55ef7c52472f 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_ct.h
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_ct.h
>>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>>>>> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/workqueue.h>
>>>>> +#include <linux/ktime.h>
>>>>> #include "intel_guc_fwif.h"
>>>>> @@ -42,7 +43,6 @@ struct intel_guc_ct_buffer {
>>>>> bool broken;
>>>>> };
>>>>> -
>>>>> /** Top-level structure for Command Transport related data
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Includes a pair of CT buffers for bi-directional communication and tracking
>>>>> @@ -69,6 +69,9 @@ struct intel_guc_ct {
>>>>> struct list_head incoming; /* incoming requests */
>>>>> struct work_struct worker; /* handler for incoming requests */
>>>>> } requests;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /** @stall_time: time of first time a CTB submission is stalled */
>>>>> + ktime_t stall_time;
>>>>
>>>> Unused in this patch.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yea, wrong patch. Will fix.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>>> };
>>>>> void intel_guc_ct_init_early(struct intel_guc_ct *ct);
>>>>> @@ -88,7 +91,7 @@ static inline bool intel_guc_ct_enabled(struct intel_guc_ct *ct)
>>>>> }
>>>>> int intel_guc_ct_send(struct intel_guc_ct *ct, const u32 *action, u32 len,
>>>>> - u32 *response_buf, u32 response_buf_size);
>>>>> + u32 *response_buf, u32 response_buf_size, u32 flags);
>>>>> void intel_guc_ct_event_handler(struct intel_guc_ct *ct);
>>>>> #endif /* _INTEL_GUC_CT_H_ */
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list