[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] [PATCH v1 09/12] drm/virtio: implement context init: allocate an array of fence contexts
.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 10:48 AM Gurchetan Singh
<gurchetansingh@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:33 PM Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 6:37 PM Gurchetan Singh
>> <gurchetansingh@chromium.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > We don't want fences from different 3D contexts (virgl, gfxstream,
>> > venus) to be on the same timeline. With explicit context creation,
>> > we can specify the number of ring each context wants.
>> >
>> > Execbuffer can specify which ring to use.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@chromium.org>
>> > Acked-by: Lingfeng Yang <lfy@google.com>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h | 3 +++
>> > drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h
>> > index a5142d60c2fa..cca9ab505deb 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h
>> > @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
>> > #define STATE_ERR 2
>> >
>> > #define MAX_CAPSET_ID 63
>> > +#define MAX_RINGS 64
>> >
>> > struct virtio_gpu_object_params {
>> > unsigned long size;
>> > @@ -263,6 +264,8 @@ struct virtio_gpu_fpriv {
>> > uint32_t ctx_id;
>> > uint32_t context_init;
>> > bool context_created;
>> > + uint32_t num_rings;
>> > + uint64_t base_fence_ctx;
>> > struct mutex context_lock;
>> > };
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c
>> > index f51f3393a194..262f79210283 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c
>> > @@ -99,6 +99,11 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>> > int in_fence_fd = exbuf->fence_fd;
>> > int out_fence_fd = -1;
>> > void *buf;
>> > + uint64_t fence_ctx;
>> > + uint32_t ring_idx;
>> > +
>> > + fence_ctx = vgdev->fence_drv.context;
>> > + ring_idx = 0;
>> >
>> > if (vgdev->has_virgl_3d == false)
>> > return -ENOSYS;
>> > @@ -106,6 +111,17 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>> > if ((exbuf->flags & ~VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FLAGS))
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > + if ((exbuf->flags & VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_RING_IDX)) {
>> > + if (exbuf->ring_idx >= vfpriv->num_rings)
>> > + return -EINVAL;
>> > +
>> > + if (!vfpriv->base_fence_ctx)
>> > + return -EINVAL;
>> > +
>> > + fence_ctx = vfpriv->base_fence_ctx;
>> > + ring_idx = exbuf->ring_idx;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > exbuf->fence_fd = -1;
>> >
>> > virtio_gpu_create_context(dev, file);
>> > @@ -173,7 +189,7 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>> > goto out_memdup;
>> > }
>> >
>> > - out_fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev, vgdev->fence_drv.context, 0);
>> > + out_fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev, fence_ctx, ring_idx);
>> > if(!out_fence) {
>> > ret = -ENOMEM;
>> > goto out_unresv;
>> > @@ -691,7 +707,7 @@ static int virtio_gpu_context_init_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > /* Number of unique parameters supported at this time. */
>> > - if (num_params > 1)
>> > + if (num_params > 2)
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > ctx_set_params = memdup_user(u64_to_user_ptr(args->ctx_set_params),
>> > @@ -731,6 +747,20 @@ static int virtio_gpu_context_init_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>> >
>> > vfpriv->context_init |= value;
>> > break;
>> > + case VIRTGPU_CONTEXT_PARAM_NUM_RINGS:
>> > + if (vfpriv->base_fence_ctx) {
>> > + ret = -EINVAL;
>> > + goto out_unlock;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + if (value > MAX_RINGS) {
>> > + ret = -EINVAL;
>> > + goto out_unlock;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + vfpriv->base_fence_ctx = dma_fence_context_alloc(value);
>> With multiple fence contexts, we should do something about implicit fencing.
>>
>> The classic example is Mesa and X server. When both use virgl and the
>> global fence context, no dma_fence_wait is fine. But when Mesa uses
>> venus and the ring fence context, dma_fence_wait should be inserted.
>
>
> If I read your comment correctly, the use case is:
>
> context A (venus)
>
> sharing a render target with
>
> context B (Xserver backed virgl)
>
> ?
>
> Which function do you envisage dma_fence_wait(...) to be inserted? Doesn't implicit synchronization mean there's no fence to share between contexts (only buffer objects)?
Fences can be implicitly shared via reservation objects associated
with buffer objects.
> It may be possible to wait on the reservation object associated with a buffer object from a different context (userspace can also do DRM_IOCTL_VIRTGPU_WAIT), but not sure if that's what you're looking for.
Right, that's what I am looking for. Userspace expects implicit
fencing to work. While there are works to move the userspace to do
explicit fencing, it is not there yet in general and we can't require
the userspace to do explicit fencing or DRM_IOCTL_VIRTGPU_WAIT.
>
>>
>>
>> > + vfpriv->num_rings = value;
>> > + break;
>> > default:
>> > ret = -EINVAL;
>> > goto out_unlock;
>> > --
>> > 2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]