Skip to content

K
kernel_linux

OpenHarmony / kernel_linux
上一次同步 4 年多

通知 15
Star 8
Fork 2
K
kernel_linux
切换分支/标签
  1. 14 11月, 2017 1 次提交
  3. 06 11月, 2017 3 次提交
  5. 11 10月, 2017 1 次提交
  7. 05 10月, 2017 1 次提交
  9. 26 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  11. 25 9月, 2017 2 次提交
  13. 22 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  15. 14 9月, 2017 1 次提交
    • M
      mm: treewide: remove GFP_TEMPORARY allocation flag · 0ee931c4
      由 Michal Hocko 提交于 
      GFP_TEMPORARY was introduced by commit e12ba74d ("Group short-lived
and reclaimable kernel allocations") along with __GFP_RECLAIMABLE.  It's
primary motivation was to allow users to tell that an allocation is
short lived and so the allocator can try to place such allocations close
together and prevent long term fragmentation.  As much as this sounds
like a reasonable semantic it becomes much less clear when to use the
highlevel GFP_TEMPORARY allocation flag.  How long is temporary? Can the
context holding that memory sleep? Can it take locks? It seems there is
no good answer for those questions.

The current implementation of GFP_TEMPORARY is basically GFP_KERNEL |
__GFP_RECLAIMABLE which in itself is tricky because basically none of
the existing caller provide a way to reclaim the allocated memory.  So
this is rather misleading and hard to evaluate for any benefits.

I have checked some random users and none of them has added the flag
with a specific justification.  I suspect most of them just copied from
other existing users and others just thought it might be a good idea to
use without any measuring.  This suggests that GFP_TEMPORARY just
motivates for cargo cult usage without any reasoning.

I believe that our gfp flags are quite complex already and especially
those with highlevel semantic should be clearly defined to prevent from
confusion and abuse.  Therefore I propose dropping GFP_TEMPORARY and
replace all existing users to simply use GFP_KERNEL.  Please note that
SLAB users with shrinkers will still get __GFP_RECLAIMABLE heuristic and
so they will be placed properly for memory fragmentation prevention.

I can see reasons we might want some gfp flag to reflect shorterm
allocations but I propose starting from a clear semantic definition and
only then add users with proper justification.

This was been brought up before LSF this year by Matthew [1] and it
turned out that GFP_TEMPORARY really doesn't have a clear semantic.  It
seems to be a heuristic without any measured advantage for most (if not
all) its current users.  The follow up discussion has revealed that
opinions on what might be temporary allocation differ a lot between
developers.  So rather than trying to tweak existing users into a
semantic which they haven't expected I propose to simply remove the flag
and start from scratch if we really need a semantic for short term
allocations.

[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170118054945.GD18349@bombadil.infradead.org

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix typo]
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
[sfr@canb.auug.org.au: drm/i915: fix up]
  Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170816144703.378d4f4d@canb.auug.org.au
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170728091904.14627-1-mhocko@kernel.orgSigned-off-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: NStephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Acked-by: NMel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Acked-by: NVlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      0ee931c4
  17. 27 7月, 2017 1 次提交
  19. 21 6月, 2017 1 次提交
  21. 17 5月, 2017 1 次提交
  23. 28 4月, 2017 2 次提交
  25. 15 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  27. 04 3月, 2017 1 次提交
  29. 03 3月, 2017 1 次提交
  31. 02 3月, 2017 1 次提交
  33. 22 2月, 2017 1 次提交
  35. 15 2月, 2017 1 次提交
  37. 07 2月, 2017 1 次提交
  39. 31 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  41. 23 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  43. 16 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  45. 07 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  47. 31 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  49. 07 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  51. 06 12月, 2016 1 次提交
    • C
      drm/i915: Use memcpy_from_wc for GPU error capture · d637c178
      由 Chris Wilson 提交于 
      On all platforms we now always read the contents of buffers via the GTT,
i.e. using WC cpu access. Reads are slow, but they can be accelerated
with an internal read buffer using sse4.1 (movntqda). This is our
i915_memcpy_from_wc() routine which also checks for sse4.1 support and
so we can fallback to using a regular slow memcpy if we need to.

When compressing the pages, the reads are currently done inside zlib's
fill_window() routine and so we must copy the page into a temporary
which is then already inside the CPU cache and fast for zlib's
compression. When not compressing the pages, we don't need a temporary
and can just use the accelerated read from WC into the destination.

v2: Use zstream locals to reduce diff and allocate the additional
temporary storage only if sse4.1 is supported.
v3: Use length=0 for the sse4.1 support check
Signed-off-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20161206124051.17040-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.ukReviewed-by: NTvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
      d637c178
  53. 02 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  55. 21 11月, 2016 5 次提交
    • M
      drm/i915: Wipe hang stats as an embedded struct · bc1d53c6
      由 Mika Kuoppala 提交于 
      Bannable property, banned status, guilty and active counts are
properties of i915_gem_context. Make them so.

v2: rebase

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NMika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1479309634-28574-1-git-send-email-mika.kuoppala@intel.com
      bc1d53c6
    • M
      drm/i915: Add per client max context ban limit · b083a087
      由 Mika Kuoppala 提交于 
      If we have a bad client submitting unfavourably across different
contexts, creating new ones, the per context scoring of badness
doesn't remove the root cause, the offending client.
To counter, keep track of per client context bans. Deny access if
client is responsible for more than 3 context bans in
it's lifetime.

v2: move ban check to context create ioctl (Chris)
v3: add commentary about hangs needed to reach client ban (Chris)

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NMika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
      b083a087
    • M
      drm/i915: Add bannable context parameter · 84102171
      由 Mika Kuoppala 提交于 
      Now when driver has per context scoring of 'hanging badness'
and also subsequent hangs during short windows are allowed,
if there is progress made in between, it does not make sense
to expose a ban timing window as a context parameter anymore.

Let the scoring be the sole indicator for ban policy and substitute
ban period context parameter as a boolean to get/set context
bannable property.

v2: allow non root to opt into being banned (Chris)

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Suggested-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NMika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
      84102171
    • M
      drm/i915: Decouple hang detection from hangcheck period · 3fe3b030
      由 Mika Kuoppala 提交于 
      Hangcheck state accumulation has gained more steps
along the years, like head movement and more recently the
subunit inactivity check. As the subunit sampling is only
done if the previous state check showed inactivity, we
have added more stages (and time) to reach a hang verdict.

Asymmetric engine states led to different actual weight of
'one hangcheck unit' and it was demonstrated in some
hangs that due to difference in stages, simpler engines
were accused falsely of a hang as their scoring was much
more quicker to accumulate above the hang treshold.

To completely decouple the hangcheck guilty score
from the hangcheck period, convert hangcheck score to a
rough period of inactivity measurement. As these are
tracked as jiffies, they are meaningful also across
reset boundaries. This makes finding a guilty engine
more accurate across multi engine activity scenarios,
especially across asymmetric engines.

We lose the ability to detect cross batch malicious attempts
to hinder the progress. Plan is to move this functionality
to be part of context banning which is more natural fit,
later in the series.

v2: use time_before macros (Chris)
    reinstate the pardoning of moving engine after hc (Chris)
v3: avoid global state for per engine stall detection (Chris)
v4: take timeline last retirement into account (Chris)
v5: do debug print on pardoning, split out retirement timestamp (Chris)

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NMika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
      3fe3b030
    • M
      drm/i915: Split up hangcheck phases · 6e16d028
      由 Mika Kuoppala 提交于 
      In order to simplify hangcheck state keeping, split hangcheck
per engine loop in three phases: state load, action, state save.

Add few more hangcheck actions to separate between seqno, head
and subunit movements. This helps to gather all the hangcheck
actions under a single switch umbrella.

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NMika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NMika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
      6e16d028
  57. 18 11月, 2016 1 次提交
  59. 17 11月, 2016 1 次提交
  61. 11 11月, 2016 2 次提交