LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
To: "Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
Cc: dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Rob Clark" <robdclark@chromium.org>,
	"open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU"
	<freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU"
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
	<linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>, "Sean Paul" <sean@poorly.run>,
	"open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
	<linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] drm/msm: Add fence->wait() op
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 08:46:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAF6AEGuHLPtJ99VOSaJEFqbSum_yWHn3cMPrwcNfRn2RU3ZB5g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9c1e797b-8860-d1f5-e6f2-e06380ec9012@gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 2:28 AM Christian König
<ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Am 22.07.21 um 11:08 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > [SNIP]
> >> As far as I know wake_up_state() tries to run the thread on the CPU it was
> >> scheduled last, while wait_event_* makes the thread run on the CPU who
> >> issues the wake by default.
> >>
> >> And yes I've also noticed this already and it was one of the reason why I
> >> suggested to use a wait_queue instead of the hand wired dma_fence_wait
> >> implementation.
> > The first versions had used wait_queue, but iirc we had some issues with
> > the callbacks and stuff and that was the reasons for hand-rolling. Or
> > maybe it was the integration of the lockless fastpath for
> > dma_fence_is_signalled().
> >
> >> [SNIP]
> >> Well it would have been nicer if we used the existing infrastructure instead
> >> of re-inventing stuff for dma_fence, but that chance is long gone.
> >>
> >> And you don't need a dma_fence_context base class, but rather just a flag in
> >> the dma_fence_ops if you want to change the behavior.
> > If there's something broken we should just fix it, not force everyone to
> > set a random flag. dma_fence work like special wait_queues, so if we
> > differ then we should go back to that.
>
> Wait a second with that, this is not broken. It's just different
> behavior and there are good arguments for both sides.
>
> If a wait is short you can have situations where you want to start the
> thread on the original CPU.
>      This is because you can assume that the caches on that CPU are
> still hot and heating up the caches on the local CPU would take longer
> than an inter CPU interrupt.
>
> But if the wait is long it makes more sense to run the thread on the CPU
> where you noticed the wake up event.
>      This is because you can assume that the caches are cold anyway and
> starting the thread on the current CPU (most likely from an interrupt
> handler) gives you the absolutely best latency.
>      In other words you usually return from the interrupt handler and
> just directly switch to the now running thread.
>
> I'm not sure if all drivers want the same behavior. Rob here seems to
> prefer number 2, but we have used 1 for dma_fence for a rather long time
> now and it could be that some people start to complain when we switch
> unconditionally.
>

Hmm, I wonder if it would make sense to have a dma_wait_fence() flag
to control the behavior, since it is maybe more about the waiter (and
perhaps how long the waiter expects to wait) than the signaler..

BR,
-R

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-07-22 15:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-20 15:07 Rob Clark
2021-07-20 18:03 ` [Linaro-mm-sig] " Christian König
2021-07-20 18:30   ` Rob Clark
2021-07-20 20:55     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-20 22:36       ` Rob Clark
2021-07-21  7:59         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-21 16:34           ` Rob Clark
2021-07-21 19:03             ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-22  8:42               ` Christian König
2021-07-22  9:08                 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-22  9:28                   ` Christian König
2021-07-22 10:47                     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-22 11:33                       ` Christian König
2021-07-22 15:46                     ` Rob Clark [this message]
2021-07-22 15:40                 ` Rob Clark

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=CAF6AEGuHLPtJ99VOSaJEFqbSum_yWHn3cMPrwcNfRn2RU3ZB5g@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=robdclark@gmail.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robdclark@chromium.org \
    --cc=sean@poorly.run \
    --subject='Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] drm/msm: Add fence->wait() op' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).