[Intel-xe] [PATCH v3 1/2] drm/xe/xe_migrate.c: Use DPA offset for page table entries.
Niranjana Vishwanathapura
niranjana.vishwanathapura at intel.com
Thu Oct 5 00:16:11 UTC 2023
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 04:31:44AM -0700, Ruhl, Michael J wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Vishwanathapura, Niranjana <niranjana.vishwanathapura at intel.com>
>>Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 7:12 PM
>>To: Kershner, David <david.kershner at intel.com>
>>Cc: intel-xe at lists.freedesktop.org; Ruhl, Michael J <michael.j.ruhl at intel.com>;
>>Fleck, John <john.fleck at intel.com>; Roper, Matthew D
>><matthew.d.roper at intel.com>; Brost, Matthew <matthew.brost at intel.com>;
>>Summers, Stuart <stuart.summers at intel.com>
>>Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] drm/xe/xe_migrate.c: Use DPA offset for page table
>>entries.
>>
>>On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 06:21:44PM -0400, David Kershner wrote:
>>>Device Physical Address (DPA) is the starting offset device memory.
>>>
>>>Update xe_migrate identity map base PTE entries to start at dpa_base
>>>instead of 0.
>>>
>>>The VM offset value should be 0 relative instead of DPA relative.
>>>
>>
>>Overall looks good to me. Some minor comments.
>>
>>>Signed-off-by: David Kershner <david.kershner at intel.com>
>>>---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_migrate.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>--
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_migrate.c | 22 ++++++++++------
>>> 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_migrate.c
>>b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_migrate.c
>>>index 6906ff9d9c31..75b06f0bd755 100644
>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_migrate.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_migrate.c
>>>@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static const struct xe_migrate_pt_update_ops
>>sanity_ops = {
>>> } } while (0)
>>>
>>> static void test_copy(struct xe_migrate *m, struct xe_bo *bo,
>>>- struct kunit *test)
>>>+ struct kunit *test, u32 region)
>>> {
>>> struct xe_device *xe = tile_to_xe(m->tile);
>>> u64 retval, expected = 0;
>>>@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static void test_copy(struct xe_migrate *m, struct
>>xe_bo *bo,
>>> struct xe_bo *sysmem = xe_bo_create_locked(xe, m->tile, NULL,
>>> bo->size,
>>> ttm_bo_type_kernel,
>>>- XE_BO_CREATE_SYSTEM_BIT
>>|
>>>+ region |
>>>
>>XE_BO_NEEDS_CPU_ACCESS);
>>
>>In this function, we should now change the bo name from 'sysmem' to 'remote'
>>or something similar.
>>
>>> if (IS_ERR(sysmem)) {
>>> KUNIT_FAIL(test, "Failed to allocate sysmem bo for %s: %li\n",
>>>@@ -187,6 +187,27 @@ static void test_copy(struct xe_migrate *m, struct
>>xe_bo *bo,
>>> xe_bo_put(sysmem);
>>> }
>>>
>>>+static void test_copy_sysmem(struct xe_migrate *m, struct xe_bo *bo,
>>>+ struct kunit *test)
>>>+{
>>>+ test_copy(m, bo, test, XE_BO_CREATE_SYSTEM_BIT);
>>>+}
>>>+
>>>+static void test_copy_vram(struct xe_migrate *m, struct xe_bo *bo,
>>>+ struct kunit *test)
>>>+{
>>>+ u32 region;
>>>+
>>>+ if (bo->ttm.resource->mem_type == XE_PL_SYSTEM)
>>>+ return;
>>>+
>>>+ if (bo->ttm.resource->mem_type == XE_PL_VRAM0)
>>>+ region = XE_BO_CREATE_VRAM1_BIT;
>>>+ else
>>>+ region = XE_BO_CREATE_VRAM0_BIT;
>>>+ test_copy(m, bo, test, region);
>>>+}
>>>+
>>> static void test_pt_update(struct xe_migrate *m, struct xe_bo *pt,
>>> struct kunit *test, bool force_gpu)
>>> {
>>>@@ -349,7 +370,11 @@ static void xe_migrate_sanity_test(struct xe_migrate
>>*m, struct kunit *test)
>>> check(retval, expected, "Command clear small last value", test);
>>>
>>> kunit_info(test, "Copying small buffer object to system\n");
>>>- test_copy(m, tiny, test);
>>>+ test_copy_sysmem(m, tiny, test);
>>>+ if (IS_DGFX(xe) && xe->info.tile_count > 1) {
>>>+ kunit_info(test, "Copying small buffer object to other vram\n");
>>>+ test_copy_vram(m, tiny, test);
>>>+ }
>>
>>Probably we don't need IS_DGFX() check. tile_count check should be good
>>enough?
>>
>>>
>>> /* Clear a big bo */
>>> kunit_info(test, "Clearing big buffer object\n");
>>>@@ -366,7 +391,11 @@ static void xe_migrate_sanity_test(struct xe_migrate
>>*m, struct kunit *test)
>>> check(retval, expected, "Command clear big last value", test);
>>>
>>> kunit_info(test, "Copying big buffer object to system\n");
>>>- test_copy(m, big, test);
>>>+ test_copy_sysmem(m, big, test);
>>>+ if (xe->info.tile_count > 1) {
>>>+ kunit_info(test, "Copying big buffer object to opposite
>>vram\n");
>>
>>s/opposite/other/
>>
>>>+ test_copy_vram(m, big, test);
>>>+ }
>>>
>>> kunit_info(test, "Testing page table update using CPU if GPU idle.\n");
>>> test_pt_update(m, pt, test, false);
>>
>>This test update should be in a separate patch.
>>
>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_migrate.c
>>b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_migrate.c
>>>index 15f091a7bba3..42942aeef595 100644
>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_migrate.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_migrate.c
>>>@@ -114,8 +114,12 @@ static u64 xe_migrate_vm_addr(u64 slot, u32 level)
>>> return (slot + 1ULL) << xe_pt_shift(level + 1);
>>> }
>>>
>>>-static u64 xe_migrate_vram_ofs(u64 addr)
>>>+static u64 xe_migrate_vram_ofs(u64 addr, struct xe_device *xe)
>>> {
>>
>>The convention is to have 'xe' as first argument, so it is better to
>>follow that.
>>
>>>+ /* Remove the DPA to get a correct offset into identity table for the
>>>+ * migrate offset
>>>+ */
>>
>>Comment format followed elsewhere is,
>>/*
>> * comments line1
>> * comments line2
>> */
>>
>>Better to follow that.
>>
>>>+ addr -= xe->mem.vram.dpa_base;
>>
>>Should never happen, but probably a good idea to add an assert
>>that addr > dpa_base? Otherwise, we will endup with hard to debug issues.
>
>How about:
>
> addr &= ~xe->mem.vram.dpa_base;
>
>?
>
I don't think that will work.
Now I am thinking that given it is a static function (not an api for
other parts of driver), it should be fine to not add any asserts.
So, we should be good here.
Niranjana
>M
>
>>> return addr + (256ULL << xe_pt_shift(2));
>>> }
>>>
>>>@@ -149,7 +153,7 @@ static int xe_migrate_create_cleared_bo(struct
>>xe_migrate *m, struct xe_vm *vm)
>>>
>>> xe_map_memset(xe, &m->cleared_bo->vmap, 0, 0x00, cleared_size);
>>> vram_addr = xe_bo_addr(m->cleared_bo, 0, XE_PAGE_SIZE);
>>>- m->cleared_vram_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(vram_addr);
>>>+ m->cleared_vram_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(vram_addr, xe);
>>>
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>@@ -225,12 +229,12 @@ static int xe_migrate_prepare_vm(struct xe_tile
>>*tile, struct xe_migrate *m,
>>> } else {
>>> u64 batch_addr = xe_bo_addr(batch, 0, XE_PAGE_SIZE);
>>>
>>>- m->batch_base_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(batch_addr);
>>>+ m->batch_base_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(batch_addr, xe);
>>>
>>> if (xe->info.supports_usm) {
>>> batch = tile->primary_gt->usm.bb_pool->bo;
>>> batch_addr = xe_bo_addr(batch, 0, XE_PAGE_SIZE);
>>>- m->usm_batch_base_ofs =
>>xe_migrate_vram_ofs(batch_addr);
>>>+ m->usm_batch_base_ofs =
>>xe_migrate_vram_ofs(batch_addr, xe);
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>>@@ -268,7 +272,9 @@ static int xe_migrate_prepare_vm(struct xe_tile *tile,
>>struct xe_migrate *m,
>>> * Use 1GB pages, it shouldn't matter the physical amount of
>>> * vram is less, when we don't access it.
>>> */
>>>- for (pos = 0; pos < xe->mem.vram.actual_physical_size; pos +=
>>SZ_1G, ofs += 8)
>>>+ for (pos = xe->mem.vram.dpa_base;
>>>+ pos < xe->mem.vram.actual_physical_size + xe-
>>>mem.vram.dpa_base;
>>>+ pos += SZ_1G, ofs += 8)
>>> xe_map_wr(xe, &bo->vmap, ofs, u64, pos | flags);
>>> }
>>>
>>>@@ -443,8 +449,8 @@ static u32 pte_update_size(struct xe_migrate *m,
>>> cmds += cmd_size;
>>> } else {
>>> /* Offset into identity map. */
>>>- *L0_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(cur->start +
>>>- vram_region_gpu_offset(res));
>>>+ *L0_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(cur->start +
>>vram_region_gpu_offset(res),
>>>+ tile_to_xe(m->tile));
>>> cmds += cmd_size;
>>> }
>>>
>>>@@ -1062,7 +1068,7 @@ static void write_pgtable(struct xe_tile *tile, struct
>>xe_bb *bb, u64 ppgtt_ofs,
>>> xe_tile_assert(tile, update->qwords <= 0x1ff);
>>> if (!ppgtt_ofs) {
>>> ppgtt_ofs = xe_migrate_vram_ofs(xe_bo_addr(update->pt_bo,
>>0,
>>>- XE_PAGE_SIZE));
>>>+ XE_PAGE_SIZE),
>>tile_to_xe(tile));
>>> }
>>>
>>> do {
>>>--
>>>2.35.1
>>>
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list