[Mesa-dev] [PATCH try 2 2/2] gallium/nouveau: move pushbuf and fences to context
imirkin at alum.mit.edu
Mon Jun 23 07:54:22 PDT 2014
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Maarten Lankhorst
<maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com> wrote:
> op 21-06-14 14:12, Ilia Mirkin schreef:
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:34 AM, Maarten Lankhorst
>> <maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com> wrote:
>>> nv30 seems to not support dma objects with offset, so simply extend the query_heap to cover the
>>> entire notifier, and use a offset in nv30_context_kick_notify.
>> It would be great if you could detail the list of transformations that
>> were done in the commit description, as well as what the "new way" is
>> (if any) for the various concepts.
> I moved the pushbuf and fences to each context separately. The PUSH_KICK on context switch ensures
> that the previous context is flushed.
I meant in the commit log :)
>> This change doesn't have any of the locking -- is that coming in a
>> future change? Otherwise we're still vulnerable to multiple threads
>> trying to render at the same time. (Now with screen sharing, even if
>> they end up with separate screens, we'd still be in trouble.)
> I haven't done any locking changes, because I don't believe locking is the answer here.
> With each context having its own pushbuf we can ensure that things aren't flushed, so
> on flush it should assume all state is dirty. After this is done the PUSH_KICK of the old
> context on context switch can be removed, and suddenly the driver is thread-safe because
> only the pushbuf to kernel command submission could race. ;-)
OK. I'm concerned that PUSH_SPACE could let us down here. We'd have to
make sure enough space were available for the whole pushbuf, which if
an inline vertex transfer is involved, could be a tricky proposition.
>> I'm still a bit concerned with moving the fence stuff to the
>> context... there might be an assumption in gallium that fences are
>> context-independent, in which case you need to make sure to have just
>> a single fence shared by everything...
> I don't think that this is the case, because it's very rare that gallium uses multiple contexts simultaneously.
> (Except vdpau interop, which does flush explicitly.)
Agreed that it's rare. vdpau interop is the main case, the minor case
is 2 screens (which will now share one pipe_screen). This is the issue
the other user was having (with the fd closing thing).
>> Have you done a full piglit run on this (with the glx tests, for good
>> measure) on nv30/nv50/nvc0? If so, can you share the results files
> No not yet. But I did confirm that glxgears and glxinfo didn't regress on my nv43, nv96 and nvc0. :-)
Well, would be good to get those results, and make sure there are no
unexpected regressions. (*-struct-pad seems to flip between fail and
pass at random, I think based on which tests were run prior... some
bit of state we're missing somewhere. One or two others like that.)
More information about the mesa-dev