Based on a sampling of a number of benchmarks across platforms, by
default opt for a much more lenient timeout so that we should not
adversely affect existing "good" clients.
640ms ought to be enough for anyone.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112169
Fixes: 3a7a92aba8 ("drm/i915/execlists: Force preemption")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen@intel.com>
Cc: Dmitry Rogozhkin <dmitry.v.rogozhkin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191125162737.2161069-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
Execlists uses a scheduling quantum (a timeslice) to alternate execution
between ready-to-run contexts of equal priority. This ensures that all
users (though only if they of equal importance) have the opportunity to
run and prevents livelocks where contexts may have implicit ordering due
to userspace semaphores. However, not all workloads necessarily benefit
from timeslicing and in the extreme some sysadmin may want to disable or
reduce the timeslicing granularity.
The timeslicing mechanism can be compiled out^W^W disabled (but should
DCE!) with
./scripts/config --set-val DRM_I915_TIMESLICE_DURATION 0
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191029091632.26281-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
Replace sampling the engine state every so often with a periodic
heartbeat request to measure the health of an engine. This is coupled
with the forced-preemption to allow long running requests to survive so
long as they do not block other users.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191023133108.21401-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
If the preempted context takes too long to relinquish control, e.g. it
is stuck inside a shader with arbitration disabled, evict that context
with an engine reset. This ensures that preemptions are reasonably
responsive, providing a tighter QoS for the more important context at
the cost of flagging unresponsive contexts more frequently (i.e. instead
of using an ~10s hangcheck, we now evict at ~100ms). The challenge of
lies in picking a timeout that can be reasonably serviced by HW for
typical workloads, balancing the existing clients against the needs for
responsiveness.
Note that coupled with timeslicing, this will lead to rapid GPU "hang"
detection with multiple active contexts vying for GPU time.
The forced preemption mechanism can be compiled out with
./scripts/config --set-val DRM_I915_PREEMPT_TIMEOUT 0
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191023133108.21401-2-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
If we are doing a normal GPU reset triggered after detecting a long
period of stalled work, we can take our time and allow the engines to
quiesce. Since we've stopped submission to the engine, and if we wait
long enough an innocent context should complete, leaving the engine idle.
So by waiting a short amount of time, we should prevent clobbering other
users when resetting a stuck context.
Suggested-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Suggested-by: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191023133108.21401-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
Do not allow runtime pm autosuspend to remove userspace GGTT mmaps too
quickly. For example, igt sets the autosuspend delay to 0, and so we
immediately attempt to perform runtime suspend upon releasing the
wakeref. Unfortunately, that involves tearing down GGTT mmaps as they
require an active device.
Override the autosuspend for GGTT mmaps, by keeping the wakeref around
for 250ms after populating the PTE for a fresh mmap.
v2: Prefer refcount_t for its under/overflow error detection
v3: Flush the user runtime autosuspend prior to system system.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190527115114.13448-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
An interesting discussion regarding "hybrid interrupt polling" for NVMe
came to the conclusion that the ideal busyspin before sleeping was half
of the expected request latency (and better if it was already halfway
through that request). This suggested that we too should look again at
our tradeoff between spinning and waiting. Currently, our spin simply
tries to hide the cost of enabling the interrupt, which is good to avoid
penalising nop requests (i.e. test throughput) and not much else.
Studying real world workloads suggests that a spin of upto 500us can
dramatically boost performance, but the suggestion is that this is not
from avoiding interrupt latency per-se, but from secondary effects of
sleeping such as allowing the CPU reduce cstate and context switch away.
In a truly hybrid interrupt polling scheme, we would aim to sleep until
just before the request completed and then wake up in advance of the
interrupt and do a quick poll to handle completion. This is tricky for
ourselves at the moment as we are not recording request times, and since
we allow preemption, our requests are not on as a nicely ordered
timeline as IO. However, the idea is interesting, for it will certainly
help us decide when busyspinning is worthwhile.
v2: Expose the spin setting via Kconfig options for easier adjustment
and testing.
v3: Don't get caught sneaking in a change to the busyspin parameters.
v4: Explain more about the "hybrid interrupt polling" scheme that we
want to migrate towards.
Suggested-by: Sagar Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
References: http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/lemoal-nvme-polling-vault-2017-final_0.pdf
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Sagar Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
Cc: Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen@intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Sagar Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190419182625.11186-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
