On 09/10/2019 11:26, Chris Wilson wrote:
The active/pending execlists is no longer protected by the
engine->active.lock, but is serialised by the tasklet instead. Update
the locking around the debug and stats to follow suit.
Fixes: df403069029d ("drm/i915/execlists: Lift process_csb() out of the irq-off
spinlock")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
---
Wrap the tasklet_lock inside execlists_active_lock() to help clarify
what it is meant to be protecting.
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine.h | 12 ++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c | 16 +++++++---------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.h | 6 ++++++
3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine.h
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine.h
index d624752f2a92..c99910c4eeb9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine.h
@@ -136,6 +136,18 @@ execlists_active(const struct intel_engine_execlists
*execlists)
return READ_ONCE(*execlists->active);
}
+static inline void
+execlists_active_lock(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
+{
+ tasklet_lock(&execlists->tasklet);
+}
+
+static inline void
+execlists_active_unlock(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
+{
+ tasklet_unlock(&execlists->tasklet);
+}
After we stop preventing the tasklet from running should we maybe kick
ksoftirqd? I am thinking if a tasklet gets scheduled and ran during us
holding the lock here, it won't lose the "scheduled" status, but not
sure at what next opportunity it would get re-run.
+
struct i915_request *
execlists_unwind_incomplete_requests(struct intel_engine_execlists
*execlists);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
index 5aa1371f6a0f..45b708fc4b52 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
@@ -1245,9 +1245,7 @@ static void intel_engine_print_registers(struct
intel_engine_cs *engine,
struct drm_printer *m)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = engine->i915;
- const struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists =
- &engine->execlists;
- unsigned long flags;
+ struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists = &engine->execlists;
u64 addr;
if (engine->id == RENDER_CLASS && IS_GEN_RANGE(dev_priv, 4, 7))
@@ -1329,7 +1327,7 @@ static void intel_engine_print_registers(struct
intel_engine_cs *engine,
idx, hws[idx * 2], hws[idx * 2 + 1]);
}
- spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->active.lock, flags);
+ execlists_active_lock(execlists);
for (port = execlists->active; (rq = *port); port++) {
char hdr[80];
int len;
@@ -1367,7 +1365,7 @@ static void intel_engine_print_registers(struct
intel_engine_cs *engine,
if (tl)
intel_timeline_put(tl);
}
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->active.lock, flags);
+ execlists_active_unlock(execlists);
} else if (INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) > 6) {
drm_printf(m, "\tPP_DIR_BASE: 0x%08x\n",
ENGINE_READ(engine, RING_PP_DIR_BASE));
@@ -1509,8 +1507,8 @@ int intel_enable_engine_stats(struct intel_engine_cs
*engine)
if (!intel_engine_supports_stats(engine))
return -ENODEV;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->active.lock, flags);
- write_seqlock(&engine->stats.lock);
+ execlists_active_lock(execlists);
+ write_seqlock_irqsave(&engine->stats.lock, flags);
if (unlikely(engine->stats.enabled == ~0)) {
err = -EBUSY;
@@ -1538,8 +1536,8 @@ int intel_enable_engine_stats(struct intel_engine_cs
*engine)
}
unlock:
- write_sequnlock(&engine->stats.lock);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->active.lock, flags);
+ write_sequnlock_irqrestore(&engine->stats.lock, flags);
+ execlists_active_unlock(execlists);
return err;
}
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.h
index 167a7b56ed5b..6795f1daa3d5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.h
@@ -77,6 +77,12 @@ struct drm_i915_private;
#define I915_GEM_IDLE_TIMEOUT (HZ / 5)
+static inline void tasklet_lock(struct tasklet_struct *t)
+{
+ while (!tasklet_trylock(t))
+ cpu_relax();
+}
+
static inline void __tasklet_disable_sync_once(struct tasklet_struct *t)
{
if (!atomic_fetch_inc(&t->count))
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
