From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: "Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: Sharat Masetty <smasetty@codeaurora.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Nayan Deshmukh <nayan26deshmukh@gmail.com>,
"Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] drm: Don't free jobs in wait_event_interruptible()
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:43:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f045e1d6-5263-58c2-ce28-2cd215067bdb@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73f058bb-8ba8-611b-e3a0-f6282445179c@amd.com>
On 26/09/2019 14:37, Koenig, Christian wrote:
> Am 26.09.19 um 14:31 schrieb Steven Price:
>> drm_sched_cleanup_jobs() attempts to free finished jobs, however because
>> it is called as the condition of wait_event_interruptible() it must not
>> sleep. Unfortuantly some free callbacks (notibly for Panfrost) do sleep.
>>
>> Instead let's rename drm_sched_cleanup_jobs() to
>> drm_sched_get_cleanup_job() and simply return a job for processing if
>> there is one. The caller can then call the free_job() callback outside
>> the wait_event_interruptible() where sleeping is possible before
>> re-checking and returning to sleep if necessary.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes from v2:
>> * Actually move list_first_entry_or_null() within the lock
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c | 42 ++++++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> index 9a0ee74d82dc..e4bd792f2b29 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> @@ -622,43 +622,41 @@ static void drm_sched_process_job(struct dma_fence *f, struct dma_fence_cb *cb)
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> - * drm_sched_cleanup_jobs - destroy finished jobs
>> + * drm_sched_get_cleanup_job - fetch the next finished job to be destroyed
>> *
>> * @sched: scheduler instance
>> *
>> - * Remove all finished jobs from the mirror list and destroy them.
>> + * Returns the next finished job from the mirror list (if there is one)
>> + * ready for it to be destroyed.
>> */
>> -static void drm_sched_cleanup_jobs(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched)
>> +static struct drm_sched_job *
>> +drm_sched_get_cleanup_job(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched)
>> {
>> + struct drm_sched_job *job = NULL;
>> unsigned long flags;
>>
>> /* Don't destroy jobs while the timeout worker is running */
>> if (sched->timeout != MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT &&
>> !cancel_delayed_work(&sched->work_tdr))
>> - return;
>> -
>> + return NULL;
>>
>> - while (!list_empty(&sched->ring_mirror_list)) {
>> - struct drm_sched_job *job;
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&sched->job_list_lock, flags);
>>
>> - job = list_first_entry(&sched->ring_mirror_list,
>> + job = list_first_entry_or_null(&sched->ring_mirror_list,
>> struct drm_sched_job, node);
>> - if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(&job->s_fence->finished))
>> - break;
>>
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&sched->job_list_lock, flags);
>> + if (job && dma_fence_is_signaled(&job->s_fence->finished)) {
>> /* remove job from ring_mirror_list */
>> list_del_init(&job->node);
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sched->job_list_lock, flags);
>> -
>> - sched->ops->free_job(job);
>> + } else {
>> + job = NULL;
>> + /* queue timeout for next job */
>> + drm_sched_start_timeout(sched);
>
> Sorry I've only seen this right now: This won't work.
>
> See you always need to start the timeout, or cancel_delayed_work() will
> abort the whole thing after returning the first job.
Good spot!
My logic was that drm_sched_main() would call again and that would
re-arm the timeout after the job has been completed.
But looking at this more closely I see that isn't actually going to work
reliably - if the work has been cancelled the first time then
cancel_delayed_work() will return false causing an early out and the
timeout isn't re-armed.
Is it as simple as moving drm_sched_start_timeout() out of the else case
and unconditionally re-arming the timeout? I'm worried about races with
the job that is being returned, although it has already been removed
from ring_mirror_list so perhaps it's safe to do?
Alternatively the caller could manually re-arm the timeout after
handling the job free.
Steve
> Christian.
>
>> }
>>
>> - /* queue timeout for next job */
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&sched->job_list_lock, flags);
>> - drm_sched_start_timeout(sched);
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sched->job_list_lock, flags);
>>
>> + return job;
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -698,12 +696,18 @@ static int drm_sched_main(void *param)
>> struct drm_sched_fence *s_fence;
>> struct drm_sched_job *sched_job;
>> struct dma_fence *fence;
>> + struct drm_sched_job *cleanup_job = NULL;
>>
>> wait_event_interruptible(sched->wake_up_worker,
>> - (drm_sched_cleanup_jobs(sched),
>> + (cleanup_job = drm_sched_get_cleanup_job(sched)) ||
>> (!drm_sched_blocked(sched) &&
>> (entity = drm_sched_select_entity(sched))) ||
>> - kthread_should_stop()));
>> + kthread_should_stop());
>> +
>> + while (cleanup_job) {
>> + sched->ops->free_job(cleanup_job);
>> + cleanup_job = drm_sched_get_cleanup_job(sched);
>> + }
>>
>> if (!entity)
>> continue;
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-26 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-26 12:31 Steven Price
2019-09-26 13:37 ` Koenig, Christian
2019-09-26 13:43 ` Steven Price [this message]
2019-09-26 13:50 ` Koenig, Christian
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f045e1d6-5263-58c2-ce28-2cd215067bdb@arm.com \
--to=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=Alexander.Deucher@amd.com \
--cc=Christian.Koenig@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nayan26deshmukh@gmail.com \
--cc=smasetty@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®