[Mesa-dev] [RFC] Linux Graphics Next: Explicit fences everywhere and no BO fences - initial proposal
maraeo at gmail.com
Tue Apr 27 12:11:02 UTC 2021
Ok. I'll interpret this as "yes, it will work, let's do it".
On Tue., Apr. 27, 2021, 08:06 Christian König, <
ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote:
> Correct, we wouldn't have synchronization between device with and without
> user queues any more.
> That could only be a problem for A+I Laptops.
> Memory management will just work with preemption fences which pause the
> user queues of a process before evicting something. That will be a
> dma_fence, but also a well known approach.
> Am 27.04.21 um 13:49 schrieb Marek Olšák:
> If we don't use future fences for DMA fences at all, e.g. we don't use
> them for memory management, it can work, right? Memory management can
> suspend user queues anytime. It doesn't need to use DMA fences. There might
> be something that I'm missing here.
> What would we lose without DMA fences? Just inter-device synchronization?
> I think that might be acceptable.
> The only case when the kernel will wait on a future fence is before a page
> flip. Everything today already depends on userspace not hanging the gpu,
> which makes everything a future fence.
> On Tue., Apr. 27, 2021, 04:02 Daniel Vetter, <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 04:59:28PM -0400, Marek Olšák wrote:
>> > Thanks everybody. The initial proposal is dead. Here are some thoughts
>> > how to do it differently.
>> > I think we can have direct command submission from userspace via
>> > memory-mapped queues ("user queues") without changing window systems.
>> > The memory management doesn't have to use GPU page faults like HMM.
>> > Instead, it can wait for user queues of a specific process to go idle
>> > then unmap the queues, so that userspace can't submit anything. Buffer
>> > evictions, pinning, etc. can be executed when all queues are unmapped
>> > (suspended). Thus, no BO fences and page faults are needed.
>> > Inter-process synchronization can use timeline semaphores. Userspace
>> > query the wait and signal value for a shared buffer from the kernel. The
>> > kernel will keep a history of those queries to know which process is
>> > responsible for signalling which buffer. There is only the wait-timeout
>> > issue and how to identify the culprit. One of the solutions is to have
>> > GPU send all GPU signal commands and all timed out wait commands via an
>> > interrupt to the kernel driver to monitor and validate userspace
>> > With that, it can be identified whether the culprit is the waiting
>> > or the signalling process and which one. Invalid signal/wait parameters
>> > also be detected. The kernel can force-signal only the semaphores that
>> > out, and punish the processes which caused the timeout or used invalid
>> > signal/wait parameters.
>> > The question is whether this synchronization solution is robust enough
>> > dma_fence and whatever the kernel and window systems need.
>> The proper model here is the preempt-ctx dma_fence that amdkfd uses
>> (without page faults). That means dma_fence for synchronization is doa, at
>> least as-is, and we're back to figuring out the winsys problem.
>> "We'll solve it with timeouts" is very tempting, but doesn't work. It's
>> akin to saying that we're solving deadlock issues in a locking design by
>> doing a global s/mutex_lock/mutex_lock_timeout/ in the kernel. Sure it
>> avoids having to reach the reset button, but that's about it.
>> And the fundamental problem is that once you throw in userspace command
>> submission (and syncing, at least within the userspace driver, otherwise
>> there's kinda no point if you still need the kernel for cross-engine sync)
>> means you get deadlocks if you still use dma_fence for sync under
>> perfectly legit use-case. We've discussed that one ad nauseam last summer:
>> See silly diagramm at the bottom.
>> Now I think all isn't lost, because imo the first step to getting to this
>> brave new world is rebuilding the driver on top of userspace fences, and
>> with the adjusted cmd submit model. You probably don't want to use amdkfd,
>> but port that as a context flag or similar to render nodes for gl/vk. Of
>> course that means you can only use this mode in headless, without
>> glx/wayland winsys support, but it's a start.
>> > Marek
>> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 4:34 PM Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org>
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 at 20:30, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> The thing is, you can't do this in drm/scheduler. At least not
>> > >> splitting up the dma_fence in the kernel into separate memory fences
>> > >> and sync fences
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I'm starting to think this thread needs its own glossary ...
>> > >
>> > > I propose we use 'residency fence' for execution fences which enact
>> > > memory-residency operations, e.g. faulting in a page ultimately
>> > > on GPU work retiring.
>> > >
>> > > And 'value fence' for the pure-userspace model suggested by timeline
>> > > semaphores, i.e. fences being (*addr == val) rather than being able
>> to look
>> > > at ctx seqno.
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Daniel
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > mesa-dev mailing list
>> > > mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
>> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>> > >
>> Daniel Vetter
>> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> mesa-dev mailing listmesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.orghttps://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the mesa-dev