| Message ID | 1341390322-5984-1-git-send-email-deathsimple@vodafone.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Christian König <deathsimple@vodafone.de> wrote: > Instead of returning the error handle it directly > and while at it fix the comments about the ring lock. > > Signed-off-by: Christian König <deathsimple@vodafone.de> > Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer@amd.com> For the series: Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h | 2 +- > drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++------------ > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h > index 77b4519b..5861ec8 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); > bool radeon_fence_signaled(struct radeon_fence *fence); > int radeon_fence_wait(struct radeon_fence *fence, bool interruptible); > int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); > -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); > +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); > int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev, > struct radeon_fence **fences, > bool intr); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > index 7b55625..be4e4f3 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > @@ -440,14 +440,11 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev, > return 0; > } > > +/* caller must hold ring lock */ > int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) > { > uint64_t seq; > > - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq but > - * it's ok as worst case is we return to early while we could have > - * wait. > - */ > seq = atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq) + 1ULL; > if (seq >= rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]) { > /* nothing to wait for, last_seq is > @@ -457,15 +454,27 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) > return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false); > } > > -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) > +/* caller must hold ring lock */ > +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) > { > - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq > - * but it's ok as wait empty is call from place where no more > - * activity can be scheduled so there won't be concurrent access > - * to seq value. > - */ > - return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring], > - ring, false, false); > + uint64_t seq = rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]; > + > + while(1) { > + int r; > + r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false); > + if (r == -EDEADLK) { > + mutex_unlock(&rdev->ring_lock); > + r = radeon_gpu_reset(rdev); > + mutex_lock(&rdev->ring_lock); > + if (!r) > + continue; > + } > + if (r) { > + dev_err(rdev->dev, "error waiting for ring to become" > + " idle (%d)\n", r); > + } > + return; > + } > } > > struct radeon_fence *radeon_fence_ref(struct radeon_fence *fence) > -- > 1.7.9.5 > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Christian König <deathsimple@vodafone.de> wrote: >> Instead of returning the error handle it directly >> and while at it fix the comments about the ring lock. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christian König <deathsimple@vodafone.de> >> Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer@amd.com> > > For the series: > > Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com> Reviewed-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h | 2 +- >> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++------------ >> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h >> index 77b4519b..5861ec8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h >> @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); >> bool radeon_fence_signaled(struct radeon_fence *fence); >> int radeon_fence_wait(struct radeon_fence *fence, bool interruptible); >> int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); >> -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); >> +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); >> int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev, >> struct radeon_fence **fences, >> bool intr); >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c >> index 7b55625..be4e4f3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c >> @@ -440,14 +440,11 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev, >> return 0; >> } >> >> +/* caller must hold ring lock */ >> int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) >> { >> uint64_t seq; >> >> - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq but >> - * it's ok as worst case is we return to early while we could have >> - * wait. >> - */ >> seq = atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq) + 1ULL; >> if (seq >= rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]) { >> /* nothing to wait for, last_seq is >> @@ -457,15 +454,27 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) >> return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false); >> } >> >> -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) >> +/* caller must hold ring lock */ >> +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) >> { >> - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq >> - * but it's ok as wait empty is call from place where no more >> - * activity can be scheduled so there won't be concurrent access >> - * to seq value. >> - */ >> - return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring], >> - ring, false, false); >> + uint64_t seq = rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]; >> + >> + while(1) { >> + int r; >> + r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false); >> + if (r == -EDEADLK) { >> + mutex_unlock(&rdev->ring_lock); >> + r = radeon_gpu_reset(rdev); >> + mutex_lock(&rdev->ring_lock); >> + if (!r) >> + continue; >> + } >> + if (r) { >> + dev_err(rdev->dev, "error waiting for ring to become" >> + " idle (%d)\n", r); >> + } >> + return; >> + } >> } >> >> struct radeon_fence *radeon_fence_ref(struct radeon_fence *fence) >> -- >> 1.7.9.5 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dri-devel mailing list >> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h index 77b4519b..5861ec8 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); bool radeon_fence_signaled(struct radeon_fence *fence); int radeon_fence_wait(struct radeon_fence *fence, bool interruptible); int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring); int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev, struct radeon_fence **fences, bool intr); diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c index 7b55625..be4e4f3 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c @@ -440,14 +440,11 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev, return 0; } +/* caller must hold ring lock */ int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) { uint64_t seq; - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq but - * it's ok as worst case is we return to early while we could have - * wait. - */ seq = atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq) + 1ULL; if (seq >= rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]) { /* nothing to wait for, last_seq is @@ -457,15 +454,27 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_next_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false); } -int radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) +/* caller must hold ring lock */ +void radeon_fence_wait_empty_locked(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring) { - /* We are not protected by ring lock when reading current seq - * but it's ok as wait empty is call from place where no more - * activity can be scheduled so there won't be concurrent access - * to seq value. - */ - return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring], - ring, false, false); + uint64_t seq = rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]; + + while(1) { + int r; + r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, ring, false, false); + if (r == -EDEADLK) { + mutex_unlock(&rdev->ring_lock); + r = radeon_gpu_reset(rdev); + mutex_lock(&rdev->ring_lock); + if (!r) + continue; + } + if (r) { + dev_err(rdev->dev, "error waiting for ring to become" + " idle (%d)\n", r); + } + return; + } } struct radeon_fence *radeon_fence_ref(struct radeon_fence *fence)