On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 12:24:41PM -0700, John Harrison wrote:
> On 8/20/2021 15:44, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > In GuC parent-child contexts the parent context controls the scheduling,
> > ensure only the parent does the scheduling operations.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.br...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 24 ++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > index dbcb9ab28a9a..00d54bb00bfb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > @@ -320,6 +320,12 @@ static void decr_context_committed_requests(struct
> > intel_context *ce)
> > GEM_BUG_ON(ce->guc_state.number_committed_requests < 0);
> > }
> > +static struct intel_context *
> > +request_to_scheduling_context(struct i915_request *rq)
> > +{
> > + return intel_context_to_parent(rq->context);
> > +}
> > +
> > static bool context_guc_id_invalid(struct intel_context *ce)
> > {
> > return ce->guc_id.id == GUC_INVALID_LRC_ID;
> > @@ -1684,6 +1690,7 @@ static void __guc_context_sched_disable(struct
> > intel_guc *guc,
> > GEM_BUG_ON(guc_id == GUC_INVALID_LRC_ID);
> > + GEM_BUG_ON(intel_context_is_child(ce));
> > trace_intel_context_sched_disable(ce);
> > guc_submission_send_busy_loop(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action),
> > @@ -1898,6 +1905,8 @@ static void guc_context_sched_disable(struct
> > intel_context *ce)
> > u16 guc_id;
> > bool enabled;
> > + GEM_BUG_ON(intel_context_is_child(ce));
> > +
> > if (submission_disabled(guc) || context_guc_id_invalid(ce) ||
> > !lrc_desc_registered(guc, ce->guc_id.id)) {
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&ce->guc_state.lock, flags);
> > @@ -2286,6 +2295,8 @@ static void guc_signal_context_fence(struct
> > intel_context *ce)
> > {
> > unsigned long flags;
> > + GEM_BUG_ON(intel_context_is_child(ce));
> > +
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&ce->guc_state.lock, flags);
> > clr_context_wait_for_deregister_to_register(ce);
> > __guc_signal_context_fence(ce);
> > @@ -2315,7 +2326,7 @@ static void guc_context_init(struct intel_context *ce)
> > static int guc_request_alloc(struct i915_request *rq)
> > {
> > - struct intel_context *ce = rq->context;
> > + struct intel_context *ce = request_to_scheduling_context(rq);
> > struct intel_guc *guc = ce_to_guc(ce);
> > unsigned long flags;
> > int ret;
> > @@ -2358,11 +2369,12 @@ static int guc_request_alloc(struct i915_request
> > *rq)
> > * exhausted and return -EAGAIN to the user indicating that they can try
> > * again in the future.
> > *
> > - * There is no need for a lock here as the timeline mutex ensures at
> > - * most one context can be executing this code path at once. The
> > - * guc_id_ref is incremented once for every request in flight and
> > - * decremented on each retire. When it is zero, a lock around the
> > - * increment (in pin_guc_id) is needed to seal a race with unpin_guc_id.
> > + * There is no need for a lock here as the timeline mutex (or
> > + * parallel_submit mutex in the case of multi-lrc) ensures at most one
> > + * context can be executing this code path at once. The guc_id_ref is
> Isn't that now two? One uni-LRC holding the timeline mutex and one multi-LRC
> holding the parallel submit mutex?
>
This is actually a stale comment and need scrub this. The
parallel_submit mutex is gone, now we grab the ce->timeline locks
starting at the parent and then all children in a loop. I think the
original comment is sufficient.
Matt
> John.
>
> > + * incremented once for every request in flight and decremented on each
> > + * retire. When it is zero, a lock around the increment (in pin_guc_id)
> > + * is needed to seal a race with unpin_guc_id.
> > */
> > if (atomic_add_unless(&ce->guc_id.ref, 1, 0))
> > goto out;
>
