Sincerely yours,
Serguei Sagalovitch
From: Andres Rodriguez <andr...@valvesoftware.com>
Sent: December 16, 2016 10:00 PM
To: Sagalovitch, Serguei; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: RE: [RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling
in amdgpu
Hey Serguei,
[Serguei] No. I mean pipe :-) as MEC define it. As far as I
understand (by simplifying)
some scheduling is per pipe. I know about the current
allocation
scheme but I do not think
that it is ideal. I would assume that we need to switch to
dynamical partition
of resources based on the workload otherwise we will have
resource
conflict
between Vulkan compute and OpenCL.
I agree the partitioning isn't ideal. I'm hoping we can
start with a
solution that assumes that
only pipe0 has any work and the other pipes are idle (no
HSA/ROCm
running on the system).
This should be more or less the use case we expect from VR
users.
I agree the split is currently not ideal, but I'd like to
consider
that a separate task, because
making it dynamic is not straight forward :P
[Serguei] Vulkan works via amdgpu (kernel submissions) so
amdkfd
will be not
involved. I would assume that in the case of VR we will
have one main
application ("console" mode(?)) so we could temporally
"ignore"
OpenCL/ROCm needs when VR is running.
Correct, this is why we want to enable the high priority
compute
queue through
libdrm-amdgpu, so that we can expose it through Vulkan later.
For current VR workloads we have 3 separate processes
running actually:
1) Game process
2) VR Compositor (this is the process that will require
high
priority queue)
3) System compositor (we are looking at approaches to
remove this
overhead)
For now I think it is okay to assume no OpenCL/ROCm running
simultaneously, but
I would also like to be able to address this case in the
future
(cross-pipe priorities).
[Serguei] The problem with pre-emption of graphics task:
(a) it
may take time so
latency may suffer
The latency is our main concern, we want something that is
predictable. A good
illustration of what the reprojection scheduling looks like
can be
found here:
https://community.amd.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/38-1310-104754/pastedImage_3.png
(b) to preempt we need to have different "context" - we want
to guarantee that submissions from the same context will
be executed
in order.
This is okay, as the reprojection work doesn't have
dependencies on
the game context, and it
even happens in a separate process.
BTW: (a) Do you want "preempt" and later resume or do you
want
"preempt" and
"cancel/abort"
Preempt the game with the compositor task and then resume it.
(b) Vulkan is generic API and could be used for graphics
as well as
for plain compute tasks (VK_QUEUE_COMPUTE_BIT).
Yeah, the plan is to use vulkan compute. But if you figure
out a way
for us to get
a guaranteed execution time using vulkan graphics, then
I'll take you
out for a beer :)
Regards,
Andres
________________________________________
From: Sagalovitch, Serguei [serguei.sagalovi...@amd.com]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 9:13 PM
To: Andres Rodriguez; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling
in amdgpu
Hi Andres,
Please see inline (as [Serguei])
Sincerely yours,
Serguei Sagalovitch
From: Andres Rodriguez <andr...@valvesoftware.com>
Sent: December 16, 2016 8:29 PM
To: Sagalovitch, Serguei; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: RE: [RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling
in amdgpu
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for the feedback. Answers inline as [AR].
Regards,
Andres
________________________________________
From: Sagalovitch, Serguei [serguei.sagalovi...@amd.com]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 8:15 PM
To: Andres Rodriguez; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling
in amdgpu
Andres,
Quick comments:
1) To minimize "bubbles", etc. we need to "force" CU
assignments/binding
to high-priority queue when it will be in use and "free"
them later
(we do not want forever take CUs from e.g. graphic task to
degrade
graphics
performance).
Otherwise we could have scenario when long graphics task (or
low-priority
compute) will took all (extra) CUs and high--priority will
wait for
needed resources.
It will not be visible on "NOP " but only when you submit
"real"
compute task
so I would recommend not to use "NOP" packets at all for
testing.
It (CU assignment) could be relatively easy done when
everything is
going via kernel
(e.g. as part of frame submission) but I must admit that I
am not sure
about the best way for user level submissions (amdkfd).
[AR] I wasn't aware of this part of the programming
sequence. Thanks
for the heads up!
Is this similar to the CU masking programming?
[Serguei] Yes. To simplify: the problem is that "scheduler"
when
deciding which
queue to run will check if there is enough resources and
if not then
it will begin
to check other queues with lower priority.
2) I would recommend to dedicate the whole pipe to
high-priority
queue and have
nothing their except it.
[AR] I'm guessing in this context you mean pipe = queue?
(as opposed
to the MEC definition
of pipe, which is a grouping of queues). I say this because
amdgpu
only has access to 1 pipe,
and the rest are statically partitioned for amdkfd usage.
[Serguei] No. I mean pipe :-) as MEC define it. As far as I
understand (by simplifying)
some scheduling is per pipe. I know about the current
allocation
scheme but I do not think
that it is ideal. I would assume that we need to switch to
dynamical partition
of resources based on the workload otherwise we will have
resource
conflict
between Vulkan compute and OpenCL.
BTW: Which user level API do you want to use for compute:
Vulkan or
OpenCL?
[AR] Vulkan
[Serguei] Vulkan works via amdgpu (kernel submissions) so
amdkfd will
be not
involved. I would assume that in the case of VR we will
have one main
application ("console" mode(?)) so we could temporally
"ignore"
OpenCL/ROCm needs when VR is running.
we will not be able to provide a solution compatible with
GFX
worloads.
I assume that you are talking about graphics? Am I right?
[AR] Yeah, my understanding is that pre-empting the
currently running
graphics job and scheduling in
something else using mid-buffer pre-emption has some cases
where it
doesn't work well. But if with
polaris10 it starts working well, it might be a better
solution for
us (because the whole reprojection
work uses the vulkan graphics stack at the moment, and
porting it to
compute is not trivial).
[Serguei] The problem with pre-emption of graphics task:
(a) it may
take time so
latency may suffer (b) to preempt we need to have different
"context"
- we want
to guarantee that submissions from the same context will be
executed
in order.
BTW: (a) Do you want "preempt" and later resume or do you
want
"preempt" and
"cancel/abort"? (b) Vulkan is generic API and could be used
for graphics as well as for plain compute tasks
(VK_QUEUE_COMPUTE_BIT).
Sincerely yours,
Serguei Sagalovitch
From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org> on
behalf of
Andres Rodriguez <andr...@valvesoftware.com>
Sent: December 16, 2016 6:15 PM
To: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in
amdgpu
Hi Everyone,
This RFC is also available as a gist here:
https://gist.github.com/lostgoat/7000432cd6864265dbc2c3ab93204249
[RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in amdgpu
gist.github.com
[RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in amdgpu
[RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in amdgpu
gist.github.com
[RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in amdgpu
[RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in amdgpu
gist.github.com
[RFC] Mechanism for high priority scheduling in amdgpu
We are interested in feedback for a mechanism to
effectively schedule
high
priority VR reprojection tasks (also referred to as
time-warping) for
Polaris10
running on the amdgpu kernel driver.
Brief context:
--------------
The main objective of reprojection is to avoid motion
sickness for VR
users in
scenarios where the game or application would fail to finish
rendering a new
frame in time for the next VBLANK. When this happens, the
user's head
movements
are not reflected on the Head Mounted Display (HMD) for the
duration
of an
extra frame. This extended mismatch between the inner ear
and the
eyes may
cause the user to experience motion sickness.
The VR compositor deals with this problem by fabricating a
new frame
using the
user's updated head position in combination with the
previous frames.
This
avoids a prolonged mismatch between the HMD output and the
inner ear.
Because of the adverse effects on the user, we require high
confidence that the
reprojection task will complete before the VBLANK interval.
Even if
the GFX pipe
is currently full of work from the game/application (which
is most
likely the case).
For more details and illustrations, please refer to the
following
document:
https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2016/03/28/asynchronous-shaders-evolved
Gaming: Asynchronous Shaders Evolved | Community
community.amd.com
One of the most exciting new developments in GPU technology
over the
past year has been the adoption of asynchronous shaders,
which can
make more efficient use of ...
Gaming: Asynchronous Shaders Evolved | Community
community.amd.com
One of the most exciting new developments in GPU technology
over the
past year has been the adoption of asynchronous shaders,
which can
make more efficient use of ...
Gaming: Asynchronous Shaders Evolved | Community
community.amd.com
One of the most exciting new developments in GPU technology
over the
past year has been the adoption of asynchronous shaders,
which can
make more efficient use of ...
Requirements:
-------------
The mechanism must expose the following functionaility:
* Job round trip time must be predictable, from
submission to
fence signal
* The mechanism must support compute workloads.
Goals:
------
* The mechanism should provide low submission latencies
Test: submitting a NOP packet through the mechanism on busy
hardware
should
be equivalent to submitting a NOP on idle hardware.
Nice to have:
-------------
* The mechanism should also support GFX workloads.
My understanding is that with the current hardware
capabilities in
Polaris10 we
will not be able to provide a solution compatible with GFX
worloads.
But I would love to hear otherwise. So if anyone has an idea,
approach or
suggestion that will also be compatible with the GFX ring,
please let
us know
about it.
* The above guarantees should also be respected by
amdkfd workloads
Would be good to have for consistency, but not strictly
necessary as
users running
games are not traditionally running HPC workloads in the
background.
Proposed approach:
------------------
Similar to the windows driver, we could expose a high priority
compute queue to
userspace.
Submissions to this compute queue will be scheduled with high
priority, and may
acquire hardware resources previously in use by other queues.
This can be achieved by taking advantage of the 'priority'
field in
the HQDs
and could be programmed by amdgpu or the amdgpu scheduler.
The relevant
register fields are:
* mmCP_HQD_PIPE_PRIORITY
* mmCP_HQD_QUEUE_PRIORITY
Implementation approach 1 - static partitioning:
------------------------------------------------
The amdgpu driver currently controls 8 compute queues from
pipe0. We can
statically partition these as follows:
* 7x regular
* 1x high priority
The relevant priorities can be set so that submissions to
the high
priority
ring will starve the other compute rings and the GFX ring.
The amdgpu scheduler will only place jobs into the high
priority
rings if the
context is marked as high priority. And a corresponding
priority
should be
added to keep track of this information:
* AMD_SCHED_PRIORITY_KERNEL
* -> AMD_SCHED_PRIORITY_HIGH
* AMD_SCHED_PRIORITY_NORMAL
The user will request a high priority context by setting an
appropriate flag
in drm_amdgpu_ctx_in (AMDGPU_CTX_HIGH_PRIORITY or similar):
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/drm/amdgpu_drm.h#L163
The setting is in a per context level so that we can:
* Maintain a consistent FIFO ordering of all
submissions to a
context
* Create high priority and non-high priority contexts
in the same
process
Implementation approach 2 - dynamic priority programming:
---------------------------------------------------------
Similar to the above, but instead of programming the
priorities and
amdgpu_init() time, the SW scheduler will reprogram the
queue priorities
dynamically when scheduling a task.
This would involve having a hardware specific callback from
the
scheduler to
set the appropriate queue priority: set_priority(int ring,
int index,
int priority)
During this callback we would have to grab the SRBM mutex
to perform
the appropriate
HW programming, and I'm not really sure if that is
something we
should be doing from
the scheduler.
On the positive side, this approach would allow us to
program a range of
priorities for jobs instead of a single "high priority"
value",
achieving
something similar to the niceness API available for CPU
scheduling.
I'm not sure if this flexibility is something that we would
need for
our use
case, but it might be useful in other scenarios (multiple
users
sharing compute
time on a server).
This approach would require a new int field in
drm_amdgpu_ctx_in, or
repurposing
of the flags field.
Known current obstacles:
------------------------
The SQ is currently programmed to disregard the HQD
priorities, and
instead it picks
jobs at random. Settings from the shader itself are also
disregarded
as this is
considered a privileged field.
Effectively we can get our compute wavefront launched ASAP,
but we
might not get the
time we need on the SQ.
The current programming would have to be changed to allow
priority
propagation
from the HQD into the SQ.
Generic approach for all HW IPs:
--------------------------------
For consistency purposes, the high priority context can be
enabled
for all HW IPs
with support of the SW scheduler. This will function
similarly to the
current
AMD_SCHED_PRIORITY_KERNEL priority, where the job can jump
ahead of
anything not
commited to the HW queue.
The benefits of requesting a high priority context for a
non-compute
queue will
be lesser (e.g. up to 10s of wait time if a GFX command is
stuck in
front of
you), but having the API in place will allow us to easily
improve the
implementation
in the future as new features become available in new
hardware.
Future steps:
-------------
Once we have an approach settled, I can take care of the
implementation.
Also, once the interface is mostly decided, we can start
thinking about
exposing the high priority queue through radv.
Request for feedback:
---------------------
We aren't married to any of the approaches outlined above.
Our goal
is to
obtain a mechanism that will allow us to complete the
reprojection
job within a
predictable amount of time. So if anyone anyone has any
suggestions for
improvements or alternative strategies we are more than
happy to hear
them.
If any of the technical information above is also
incorrect, feel
free to point
out my misunderstandings.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Regards,
Andres
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
amd-gfx Info Page - lists.freedesktop.org
lists.freedesktop.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the
amd-gfx Archives. Using amd-gfx: To post a message to all
the list
members, send email ...
amd-gfx Info Page - lists.freedesktop.org
lists.freedesktop.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the
amd-gfx Archives. Using amd-gfx: To post a message to all
the list
members, send email ...
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
