1. 22 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  2. 11 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  3. 09 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  4. 23 12月, 2019 1 次提交
  5. 22 12月, 2019 1 次提交
  6. 18 12月, 2019 2 次提交
  7. 09 12月, 2019 1 次提交
  8. 06 12月, 2019 1 次提交
  9. 05 12月, 2019 1 次提交
  10. 04 12月, 2019 1 次提交
  11. 31 10月, 2019 1 次提交
  12. 22 10月, 2019 1 次提交
  13. 15 10月, 2019 2 次提交
  14. 04 10月, 2019 6 次提交
  15. 20 9月, 2019 1 次提交
    • C
      drm/i915: Mark i915_request.timeline as a volatile, rcu pointer · d19d71fc
      Chris Wilson 提交于
      The request->timeline is only valid until the request is retired (i.e.
      before it is completed). Upon retiring the request, the context may be
      unpinned and freed, and along with it the timeline may be freed. We
      therefore need to be very careful when chasing rq->timeline that the
      pointer does not disappear beneath us. The vast majority of users are in
      a protected context, either during request construction or retirement,
      where the timeline->mutex is held and the timeline cannot disappear. It
      is those few off the beaten path (where we access a second timeline) that
      need extra scrutiny -- to be added in the next patch after first adding
      the warnings about dangerous access.
      
      One complication, where we cannot use the timeline->mutex itself, is
      during request submission onto hardware (under spinlocks). Here, we want
      to check on the timeline to finalize the breadcrumb, and so we need to
      impose a second rule to ensure that the request->timeline is indeed
      valid. As we are submitting the request, it's context and timeline must
      be pinned, as it will be used by the hardware. Since it is pinned, we
      know the request->timeline must still be valid, and we cannot submit the
      idle barrier until after we release the engine->active.lock, ergo while
      submitting and holding that spinlock, a second thread cannot release the
      timeline.
      
      v2: Don't be lazy inside selftests; hold the timeline->mutex for as long
      as we need it, and tidy up acquiring the timeline with a bit of
      refactoring (i915_active_add_request)
      Signed-off-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
      Reviewed-by: NTvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
      Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190919111912.21631-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
      d19d71fc
  16. 11 9月, 2019 1 次提交
  17. 10 9月, 2019 2 次提交
  18. 22 8月, 2019 2 次提交
  19. 20 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  20. 17 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  21. 16 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  22. 13 8月, 2019 2 次提交
  23. 07 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  24. 03 8月, 2019 1 次提交
    • C
      drm/i915: Hide unshrinkable context objects from the shrinker · 1aff1903
      Chris Wilson 提交于
      The shrinker cannot touch objects used by the contexts (logical state
      and ring). Currently we mark those as "pin_global" to let the shrinker
      skip over them, however, if we remove them from the shrinker lists
      entirely, we don't event have to include them in our shrink accounting.
      
      By keeping the unshrinkable objects in our shrinker tracking, we report
      a large number of objects available to be shrunk, and leave the shrinker
      deeply unsatisfied when we fail to reclaim those. The shrinker will
      persist in trying to reclaim the unavailable objects, forcing the system
      into a livelock (not even hitting the dread oomkiller).
      
      v2: Extend unshrinkable protection for perma-pinned scratch and guc
      allocations (Tvrtko)
      v3: Notice that we should be pinned when marking unshrinkable and so the
      link cannot be empty; merge duplicate paths.
      Signed-off-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
      Reviewed-by: NMatthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
      Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190802212137.22207-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
      1aff1903
  25. 02 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  26. 30 7月, 2019 1 次提交
  27. 03 7月, 2019 1 次提交
  28. 22 6月, 2019 2 次提交
  29. 21 6月, 2019 1 次提交