[PATCH v4 12/30] drm/xe: Move ufence check to op_lock
Zeng, Oak
oak.zeng at intel.com
Mon Mar 25 20:37:28 UTC 2024
Patch makes sense to me. See one comment inline
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-xe <intel-xe-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Matthew
> Brost
> Sent: Friday, March 8, 2024 12:08 AM
> To: intel-xe at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Brost, Matthew <matthew.brost at intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH v4 12/30] drm/xe: Move ufence check to op_lock
>
> Rather than checking for an unsignaled ufence ay unbind time, check for
> this during the op_lock function. This will help with the transition to
> job 1 per VM bind IOCTL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> index 4432531f39fe..5767955529dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> @@ -1665,16 +1665,6 @@ xe_vm_unbind_vma(struct xe_vma *vma, struct
> xe_exec_queue *q,
>
> trace_xe_vma_unbind(vma);
>
> - if (vma->ufence) {
> - struct xe_user_fence * const f = vma->ufence;
> -
> - if (!xe_sync_ufence_get_status(f))
> - return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> -
> - vma->ufence = NULL;
> - xe_sync_ufence_put(f);
> - }
> -
> if (number_tiles > 1) {
> fences = kmalloc_array(number_tiles, sizeof(*fences),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -2721,6 +2711,21 @@ static int vma_lock(struct drm_exec *exec, struct
> xe_vma *vma, bool validate)
> return err;
> }
>
> +static int check_ufence(struct xe_vma *vma)
> +{
> + if (vma->ufence) {
> + struct xe_user_fence * const f = vma->ufence;
> +
> + if (!xe_sync_ufence_get_status(f))
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + vma->ufence = NULL;
> + xe_sync_ufence_put(f);
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int op_lock(struct drm_exec *exec, struct xe_vm *vm,
> struct xe_vma_op *op)
> {
> @@ -2731,6 +2736,10 @@ static int op_lock(struct drm_exec *exec, struct xe_vm
> *vm,
> err = vma_lock(exec, op-
> >map.vma, !xe_vm_in_fault_mode(vm));
> break;
> case DRM_GPUVA_OP_REMAP:
> + err = check_ufence(gpuva_to_vma(op->base.remap.unmap-
> >va));
This is another reason we need to rename op_lock...
Oak
> + if (err)
> + break;
> +
> err = vma_lock(exec, gpuva_to_vma(op->base.remap.unmap-
> >va),
> false);
> if (!err && op->remap.prev)
> @@ -2739,6 +2748,10 @@ static int op_lock(struct drm_exec *exec, struct xe_vm
> *vm,
> err = vma_lock(exec, op->remap.next, true);
> break;
> case DRM_GPUVA_OP_UNMAP:
> + err = check_ufence(gpuva_to_vma(op->base.unmap.va));
> + if (err)
> + break;
> +
> err = vma_lock(exec, gpuva_to_vma(op->base.unmap.va), false);
> break;
> case DRM_GPUVA_OP_PREFETCH:
> --
> 2.34.1
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list