[Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 00/20] Initial Xe driver submission
Oded Gabbay
ogabbay at kernel.org
Mon Feb 27 12:46:28 UTC 2023
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 10:51 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> [I thought I've sent this out earlier this week, but alas got stuck, kinda
> bad timing now since I'm out next week but oh well]
>
> So xe is a quite substantial thing, and I think we need a clear plan how to land
> this or it will take forever, and managers will panic. Also I'm not a big fan of
> "Dave/me reviews everything", we defacto had that for amd's dc/dal and it was
> not fun. The idea here is how to get everything reviewed without having two
> people end up somewhat arbitrary as deciders.
>
> I've compiled a bunch of topics on what I think the important areas are, first
> code that should be consistent about new-style render drivers that are aimed for
> vk/compute userspace as the primary feature driver:
>
> - figure out consensus solution for fw scheduler and drm/sched frontend among
> interested driver parties (probably xe, amdgpu, nouveau, new panfrost)
>
> - for the interface itself it might be good to have the drm_gpu_scheduler as the
> single per-hw-engine driver api object (but internally a new structure), while
> renaming the current drm_gpu_scheduler to drm_gpu_sched_internal. That way I
> think we can address the main critique of the current xe scheduler plan
> - keep the drm_gpu_sched_internal : drm_sched_entity 1:1 relationship for fw
> scheduler
> - keep the driver api relationship of drm_gpu_scheduler : drm_sched_entity
> 1:n, the api functions simply iterate over a mutex protect list of internal
> schedulers. this should also help drivers with locking mistakes around
> setup/teardown and gpu reset.
> - drivers select with a flag or something between the current mode (where the
> drm_gpu_sched_internal is attached to the drm_gpu_scheduler api object) or
> the new fw scheduler mode (where drm_gpu_sched_internal is attached to the
> drm_sched_entity)
> - overall still no fundamental changes (like the current patches) to drm/sched
> data structures and algorithms. But unlike the current patches we keep the
> possibility open for eventual refactoring without having to again refactor
> all the drivers. Even better, we can delay such refactoring until we have a
> handful of real-word drivers test-driving this all so we know we actually do
> the right thing. This should allow us to address all the
> fairness/efficiency/whatever concerns that have been floating around without
> having to fix them all up upfront, before we actually know what needs to be
> fixed.
>
> - the generic scheduler code should also including the handling of endless
> compute contexts, with the minimal scaffolding for preempt-ctx fences
> (probably on the drm_sched_entity) and making sure drm/sched can cope with the
> lack of job completion fence. This is very minimal amounts of code, but it
> helps a lot for cross-driver review if this works the same (with the same
> locking and all that) for everyone. Ideally this gets extracted from amdkfd,
> but as long as it's going to be used by all drivers supporting
> endless/compute context going forward it's good enough.
>
> - I'm assuming this also means Matt Brost will include a patch to add himself as
> drm/sched reviewer in MAINTAINERS, or at least something like that
>
> - adopt the gem_exec/vma helpers. again we probably want consensus here among
> the same driver projects. I don't care whether these helpers specify the ioctl
> structs or not, but they absolutely need to enforce the overall locking scheme
> for all major structs and list (so vm and vma).
>
> - we also should have cross-driver consensus on async vm_bind support. I think
> everyone added in-syncobj support, the real fun is probably more in/out
> userspace memory fences (and personally I'm still not sure that's a good idea
> but ... *eh*). I think cross driver consensus on how this should work (ideally
> with helper support so people don't get it wrong in all the possible ways)
> would be best.
>
> - this also means some userptr integration and some consensus how userptr should
> work for vm_bind across drivers. I don't think allowing drivers to reinvent
> that wheel is a bright idea, there's just a bit too much to get wrong here.
>
> - for some of these the consensus might land on more/less shared code than what
> I sketched out above, the important part really is that we have consensus on
> these. Kinda similar to how the atomic kms infrastructure move a _lot_ more of
> the code back into drivers, because they really just needed the flexibility to
> program the hw correctly. Right now we definitely don't have enough shared
> code, for sure with i915-gem, but we also need to make sure we're not
> overcorrecting too badly (a bit of overcorrecting generally doesn't hurt).
>
> All the above will make sure that the driver overall is in concepts and design
> aligned with the overall community direction, but I think it'd still be good if
> someone outside of the intel gpu group reviews the driver code itself. Last time
> we had a huge driver submission (amd's DC/DAL) this fell on Dave&me, but this
> time around I think we have a perfect candidate with Oded:
>
> - Oded needs/wants to spend some time on ramping up on how drm render drivers
> work anyway, and xe is probably the best example of a driver that's both
> supposed to be full-featured, but also doesn't contain an entire display
> driver on the side.
>
> - Oded is in Habana, which is legally part of Intel. Bean counter budget
> shuffling to make this happen should be possible.
>
> - Habana is still fairly distinct entity within Intel, so that is probably the
> best approach for some independent review, without making the xe team
> beholden to some non-Intel people.
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for suggesting it, I'll gladly do it.
I guess I'll have more feedback on the plan itself after I'll start
going over the current Xe driver code.
Oded
>
> The above should yield some pretty clear road towards landing xe, without any
> big review fights with Dave/me like we had with amd's DC/DAL, which took a
> rather long time to land unfortunately :-(
>
> These are just my thoughts, let the bikeshed commence!
>
> Ideally we put them all into a TODO like we've done for DC/DAL, once we have
> some consensus.
>
> Cheers, Daniel
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 02:21:07PM -0800, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is a submission for Xe, a new driver for Intel GPUs that supports both
> > integrated and discrete platforms starting with Tiger Lake (first platform with
> > Intel Xe Architecture). The intention of this new driver is to have a fresh base
> > to work from that is unencumbered by older platforms, whilst also taking the
> > opportunity to rearchitect our driver to increase sharing across the drm
> > subsystem, both leveraging and allowing us to contribute more towards other
> > shared components like TTM and drm/scheduler. The memory model is based on VM
> > bind which is similar to the i915 implementation. Likewise the execbuf
> > implementation for Xe is very similar to execbuf3 in the i915 [1].
> >
> > The code is at a stage where it is already functional and has experimental
> > support for multiple platforms starting from Tiger Lake, with initial support
> > implemented in Mesa (for Iris and Anv, our OpenGL and Vulkan drivers), as well
> > as in NEO (for OpenCL and Level0). A Mesa MR has been posted [2] and NEO
> > implementation will be released publicly early next year. We also have a suite
> > of IGTs for XE that will appear on the IGT list shortly.
> >
> > It has been built with the assumption of supporting multiple architectures from
> > the get-go, right now with tests running both on X86 and ARM hosts. And we
> > intend to continue working on it and improving on it as part of the kernel
> > community upstream.
> >
> > The new Xe driver leverages a lot from i915 and work on i915 continues as we
> > ready Xe for production throughout 2023.
> >
> > As for display, the intent is to share the display code with the i915 driver so
> > that there is maximum reuse there. Currently this is being done by compiling the
> > display code twice, but alternatives to that are under consideration and we want
> > to have more discussion on what the best final solution will look like over the
> > next few months. Right now, work is ongoing in refactoring the display codebase
> > to remove as much as possible any unnecessary dependencies on i915 specific data
> > structures there..
> >
> > We currently have 2 submission backends, execlists and GuC. The execlist is
> > meant mostly for testing and is not fully functional while GuC backend is fully
> > functional. As with the i915 and GuC submission, in Xe the GuC firmware is
> > required and should be placed in /lib/firmware/xe.
> >
> > The GuC firmware can be found in the below location:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/tree/i915
> >
> > The easiest way to setup firmware is:
> > cp -r /lib/firmware/i915 /lib/firmware/xe
> >
> > The code has been organized such that we have all patches that touch areas
> > outside of drm/xe first for review, and then the actual new driver in a separate
> > commit. The code which is outside of drm/xe is included in this RFC while
> > drm/xe is not due to the size of the commit. The drm/xe is code is available in
> > a public repo listed below.
> >
> > Xe driver commit:
> > https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-xe/commit/?h=drm-xe-next&id=9cb016ebbb6a275f57b1cb512b95d5a842391ad7
> >
> > Xe kernel repo:
> > https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-xe/
> >
> > There's a lot of work still to happen on Xe but we're very excited about it and
> > wanted to share it early and welcome feedback and discussion.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Matthew Brost
> >
> > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/105879/
> > [2] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/20418
> >
> > Maarten Lankhorst (12):
> > drm/amd: Convert amdgpu to use suballocation helper.
> > drm/radeon: Use the drm suballocation manager implementation.
> > drm/i915: Remove gem and overlay frontbuffer tracking
> > drm/i915/display: Neuter frontbuffer tracking harder
> > drm/i915/display: Add more macros to remove all direct calls to uncore
> > drm/i915/display: Remove all uncore mmio accesses in favor of intel_de
> > drm/i915: Rename find_section to find_bdb_section
> > drm/i915/regs: Set DISPLAY_MMIO_BASE to 0 for xe
> > drm/i915/display: Fix a use-after-free when intel_edp_init_connector
> > fails
> > drm/i915/display: Remaining changes to make xe compile
> > sound/hda: Allow XE as i915 replacement for sound
> > mei/hdcp: Also enable for XE
> >
> > Matthew Brost (5):
> > drm/sched: Convert drm scheduler to use a work queue rather than
> > kthread
> > drm/sched: Add generic scheduler message interface
> > drm/sched: Start run wq before TDR in drm_sched_start
> > drm/sched: Submit job before starting TDR
> > drm/sched: Add helper to set TDR timeout
> >
> > Thomas Hellström (3):
> > drm/suballoc: Introduce a generic suballocation manager
> > drm: Add a gpu page-table walker helper
> > drm/ttm: Don't print error message if eviction was interrupted
> >
> > drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 5 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile | 4 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/Kconfig | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h | 26 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c | 14 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 12 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ib.c | 5 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_object.h | 23 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h | 3 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sa.c | 320 +-----------------
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_pt_walk.c | 159 +++++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_suballoc.c | 301 ++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/hsw_ips.c | 7 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/i9xx_plane.c | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic.c | 2 +
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_atomic_plane.c | 25 +-
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c | 71 ++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bw.c | 36 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c | 68 ++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_crtc.c | 14 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cursor.c | 14 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_de.h | 38 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 155 +++++++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.h | 9 +-
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_core.h | 5 +-
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_debugfs.c | 8 +
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c | 40 ++-
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +
> > .../i915/display/intel_display_power_map.c | 7 +
> > .../i915/display/intel_display_power_well.c | 24 +-
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_reg_defs.h | 4 +
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_trace.h | 6 +
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h | 32 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c | 17 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c | 11 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_aux.c | 6 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpio_phy.c | 9 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpio_phy.h | 15 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll.c | 8 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.c | 4 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_drrs.c | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c | 124 +++++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c | 26 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fb.c | 108 ++++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fb_pin.c | 6 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c | 49 ++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbdev.c | 108 +++++-
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_frontbuffer.c | 103 +-----
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_frontbuffer.h | 67 +---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_gmbus.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdcp.c | 9 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_hdmi.c | 1 -
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_lpe_audio.h | 8 +
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_setup.c | 11 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_opregion.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_overlay.c | 14 -
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pch_display.h | 16 +
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pch_refclk.h | 8 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pipe_crc.c | 1 +
> > .../drm/i915/display/intel_plane_initial.c | 3 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_psr.c | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sprite.c | 21 ++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vga.c | 5 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_scaler.c | 2 +
> > .../drm/i915/display/skl_universal_plane.c | 52 ++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c | 25 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_clflush.c | 4 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_domain.c | 7 -
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 2 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c | 25 --
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h | 22 --
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_phys.c | 4 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_regs.h | 3 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 1 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 8 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 1 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg_defs.h | 8 +
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c | 12 -
> > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h | 55 +--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ib.c | 12 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_object.h | 25 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_sa.c | 314 ++---------------
> > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_semaphore.c | 6 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c | 182 +++++++---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 3 +-
> > drivers/misc/mei/hdcp/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > drivers/misc/mei/hdcp/mei_hdcp.c | 3 +-
> > include/drm/drm_pt_walk.h | 161 +++++++++
> > include/drm/drm_suballoc.h | 112 ++++++
> > include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h | 41 ++-
> > sound/hda/hdac_i915.c | 17 +-
> > sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c | 56 +--
> > sound/soc/intel/avs/core.c | 13 +-
> > sound/soc/sof/intel/hda.c | 7 +-
> > 98 files changed, 2076 insertions(+), 1325 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_pt_walk.c
> > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_suballoc.c
> > create mode 100644 include/drm/drm_pt_walk.h
> > create mode 100644 include/drm/drm_suballoc.h
> >
> > --
> > 2.37.3
> >
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list