[Intel-gfx] [RFC 1/1] drm/i915/dgfx: Handling of pin_map against rpm
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Thu Sep 15 14:17:42 UTC 2022
On 15/09/2022 11:33, Anshuman Gupta wrote:
> If i915 gem obj lies in lmem, then i915_gem_object_pin_map
> need to grab a rpm wakeref to make sure gfx PCIe endpoint
> function stays in D0 state during any access to mapping
> returned by i915_gem_object_pin_map().
> Subsequently i915_gem_object_upin_map will put the wakref as well.
>
> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti at linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c | 2 ++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h | 5 +++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c | 8 ++++++++
> 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> index 85482a04d158..f291f990838d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> @@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ void i915_gem_object_init(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> mutex_init(&obj->mm.get_page.lock);
> INIT_RADIX_TREE(&obj->mm.get_dma_page.radix, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> mutex_init(&obj->mm.get_dma_page.lock);
> + mutex_init(&obj->wakeref_lock);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -110,6 +111,7 @@ void __i915_gem_object_fini(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> {
> mutex_destroy(&obj->mm.get_page.lock);
> mutex_destroy(&obj->mm.get_dma_page.lock);
> + mutex_destroy(&obj->wakeref_lock);
> dma_resv_fini(&obj->base._resv);
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h
> index 7317d4102955..b31ac6e4c272 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h
> @@ -501,6 +501,11 @@ static inline void i915_gem_object_flush_map(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> */
> static inline void i915_gem_object_unpin_map(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> {
> + mutext_lock(obj->wakeref_lock);
> + if (!--obj->wakeref_count)
> + intel_runtime_pm_put(&to_i915(obj->base.dev)->runtime_pm, obj->wakeref);
> + mutext_unlock(obj->wakeref_lock);
> +
> i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj);
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h
> index 9f6b14ec189a..34aff95a1984 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h
> @@ -657,6 +657,20 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_object {
>
> void *gvt_info;
> };
> +
> + /**
> + * wakeref to protect the i915 lmem iomem mappings.
> + * We don't pin_map an object partially that makes easy
> + * to track the wakeref cookie, if wakeref is already held
> + * then we don't need to grab it again for other pin_map.
> + * first pin_map will grab the wakeref and last unpin_map
> + * will put the wakeref.
> + */
> + intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
> + unsigned int wakeref_count;
> +
> + /** protects the wakeref_count wakeref cookie against multiple pin_map and unpin_map */
> + struct mutex wakeref_lock;
On one side it feels wasteful to have counters per object. But then I
also notice pin_map is only allowed under the obj dma_resv locked -
meaning that lock is already held. So you possibly don't need a new
mutex, someone more up to date please confirm.
Option B - trading space efficieny for one more atomic - would be to
track it on the level of i915 and maybe use atomic_t? Would we have to
worry about overflow more in this case? Hm some protection regardless of
the option will be needed just in case.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> };
>
> static inline struct drm_i915_gem_object *
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c
> index 4df50b049cea..b638b5413280 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c
> @@ -370,6 +370,14 @@ void *i915_gem_object_pin_map(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
>
> assert_object_held(obj);
>
> + if (i915_gem_object_is_lmem(obj)) {
> + mutex_lock(&obj->wakeref_lock);
> + if (!obj->wakeref_count++)
> + obj->wakeref =
> + intel_runtime_pm_get(&to_i915(obj->base.dev)->runtime_pm);
> + mutex_unlock(&obj->wakeref_lock);
> + }
> +
> pinned = !(type & I915_MAP_OVERRIDE);
> type &= ~I915_MAP_OVERRIDE;
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list