On Wed, 30 May 2012 20:21:33 +0200
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> Both need to do the same dance (or at least should). Some slight
> changes:
> - busy_ioctl now unconditionally checks for olr. Before emitting a
> require flush would have prevent the olr check and hence required a
> second call to the busy ioctl to really emit the request.
> - the timeout wait now also retires request. Not really required for
> abi-reasons, but makes a notch more sense imo.
>
The one thing I dislike about the retiring behavior is it is still not
guaranteed. After some coffee, I've remembered a bit about this. Since
we do an non-blocking wait, it's possible for userspace to race against
itself and rebusy the object. Therefore, the client should never assume
the call to wait_ioctl is the same as busy. (Busy has a similar, shorter
race; but also has a little smarter semantics). Therefore, I don't think
this buys us much, but I also don't think it hurts. So I'd vote on
letting Eric decide if he wants this or not.
> I've tested this by pimping the i-g-t test some more and also checking
> the polling behviour of the wait_rendering_timeout ioctl versus what
> busy_ioctl returns.
>
> Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index d2eaa00..521e294 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -2000,6 +2000,31 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering(struct
> drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> }
>
> /**
> + * Ensures that an object will eventually get non-busy by flushing any
> required
> + * write domains, emitting any outstanding lazy request and retiring and
> + * completed requests. The unplug moniker is stolen from the linux block
> layer.
> + */
I'd prefer something like, "unbusy" but whatever.
> +static int
> +i915_gem_unplug_object(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (obj->active) {
> + ret = i915_gem_object_flush_gpu_write_domain(obj);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = i915_gem_check_olr(obj->ring,
> + obj->last_rendering_seqno);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + i915_gem_retire_requests_ring(obj->ring);
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> * i915_gem_wait_ioctl - implements DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_WAIT
> * @DRM_IOCTL_ARGS: standard ioctl arguments
> *
> @@ -2043,11 +2068,8 @@ i915_gem_wait_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void
> *data, struct drm_file *file)
> return -ENOENT;
> }
>
> - /* Need to make sure the object is flushed first. This non-obvious
> - * flush is required to enforce that (active && !olr) == no wait
> - * necessary.
> - */
> - ret = i915_gem_object_flush_gpu_write_domain(obj);
> + /* Need to make sure the object gets un-active eventually. */
> + ret = i915_gem_unplug_object(obj);
> if (ret)
> goto out;
I can't remember the reason offhand, but I vaguely recall Chris demanded
we flush the write domain even if the object isn't active. Perhaps you
can look up the email, or he can chime in. I forget the exact reason.
>
> @@ -2059,10 +2081,6 @@ i915_gem_wait_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void
> *data, struct drm_file *file)
> if (seqno == 0)
> goto out;
>
> - ret = i915_gem_check_olr(ring, seqno);
> - if (ret)
> - goto out;
> -
> /* Do this after OLR check to make sure we make forward progress polling
> * on this IOCTL with a 0 timeout (like busy ioctl)
> */
> @@ -3302,30 +3320,9 @@ i915_gem_busy_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> * become non-busy without any further actions, therefore emit any
> * necessary flushes here.
> */
> - args->busy = obj->active;
> - if (args->busy) {
> - /* Unconditionally flush objects, even when the gpu still uses
> this
> - * object. Userspace calling this function indicates that it
> wants to
> - * use this buffer rather sooner than later, so issuing the
> required
> - * flush earlier is beneficial.
> - */
> - if (obj->base.write_domain & I915_GEM_GPU_DOMAINS) {
> - ret = i915_gem_flush_ring(obj->ring,
> - 0, obj->base.write_domain);
> - } else {
> - ret = i915_gem_check_olr(obj->ring,
> - obj->last_rendering_seqno);
> - }
> + ret = i915_gem_unplug_object(obj);
>
> - /* Update the active list for the hardware's current position.
> - * Otherwise this only updates on a delayed timer or when irqs
> - * are actually unmasked, and our working set ends up being
> - * larger than required.
> - */
> - i915_gem_retire_requests_ring(obj->ring);
> -
> - args->busy = obj->active;
> - }
> + args->busy = obj->active;
>
> drm_gem_object_unreference(&obj->base);
> unlock:
--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
