[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] Drop wbinvd_on_all_cpus usage
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Mon Mar 21 12:22:37 UTC 2022
On 21/03/2022 11:03, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> Hi, Tvrtko.
>
> On 3/21/22 11:27, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 19/03/2022 19:42, Michael Cheng wrote:
>>> To align with the discussion in [1][2], this patch series drops all
>>> usage of
>>> wbvind_on_all_cpus within i915 by either replacing the call with certain
>>> drm clflush helpers, or reverting to a previous logic.
>>
>> AFAIU, complaint from [1] was that it is wrong to provide non x86
>> implementations under the wbinvd_on_all_cpus name. Instead an arch
>> agnostic helper which achieves the same effect could be created. Does
>> Arm have such concept?
>
> I also understand Linus' email like we shouldn't leak incoherent IO to
> other architectures, meaning any remaining wbinvd()s should be X86 only.
The last part is completely obvious since it is a x86 instruction name.
But I think we can't pick a solution until we know how the concept maps
to Arm and that will also include seeing how the drm_clflush_sg for Arm
would look. Is there a range based solution, or just a big hammer there.
If the latter, then it is no good to churn all these reverts but instead
an arch agnostic wrapper, with a generic name, would be the way to go.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> Also, wbinvd_on_all_cpus() can become very costly, hence prefer the
> range apis when possible if they can be verified not to degrade
> performance.
>
>
>>
>> Given that the series seems to be taking a different route, avoiding
>> the need to call wbinvd_on_all_cpus rather than what [1] suggests
>> (note drm_clflush_sg can still call it!?), concern is that the series
>> has a bunch of reverts and each one needs to be analyzed.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
> /Thomas
>
>
>
>>
>> For instance looking at just the last one, 64b95df91f44, who has
>> looked at the locking consequences that commit describes:
>>
>> """
>> Inside gtt_restore_mappings() we currently take the
>> obj->resv->lock, but
>> in the future we need to avoid taking this fs-reclaim tainted lock
>> as we
>> need to extend the coverage of the vm->mutex. Take advantage of the
>> single-threaded nature of the early resume phase, and do a single
>> wbinvd() to flush all the GTT objects en masse.
>>
>> """
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Then there are suspend and freeze reverts which presumably can regress
>> the suspend times. Any data on those?
>>
>> Adding Matt since he was the reviewer for that work so might remember
>> something.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tvrtko
>>
>>
>>> [1].
>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2021-November/330928.html
>>>
>>> [2]. https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/475752/?series=99991&rev=5
>>>
>>> Michael Cheng (4):
>>> i915/gem: drop wbinvd_on_all_cpus usage
>>> Revert "drm/i915/gem: Almagamate clflushes on suspend"
>>> i915/gem: Revert i915_gem_freeze to previous logic
>>> drm/i915/gt: Revert ggtt_resume to previous logic
>>>
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_dmabuf.c | 9 +---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pm.c | 56 ++++++++++++++--------
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ggtt.c | 17 +++----
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.h | 2 +-
>>> 4 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list