Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757517AbaGWMgU (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:36:20 -0400 Received: from mail-bn1blp0184.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.163.184]:43601 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753005AbaGWMgR convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:36:17 -0400 X-WSS-ID: 0N960CC-07-S8O-02 X-M-MSG: Message-ID: <53CFAC38.9050501@amd.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:36:08 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2hyaXN0aWFuIEvDtm5pZw==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Vetter CC: Maarten Lankhorst , =?UTF-8?B?Q2hyaXM=?= =?UTF-8?B?dGlhbiBLw7ZuaWc=?= , Thomas Hellstrom , nouveau , LKML , dri-devel , Ben Skeggs , "Deucher, Alexander" Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 09/17] drm/radeon: use common fence implementation for fences References: <20140709093124.11354.3774.stgit@patser> <53CF58FB.8070609@canonical.com> <53CF5B9F.1050800@amd.com> <53CF5EFE.6070307@canonical.com> <53CF63C2.7070407@vodafone.de> <53CF6622.6060803@amd.com> <53CF699D.9070902@canonical.com> <53CF6B18.5070107@vodafone.de> <53CF7035.2060808@amd.com> <53CF7191.2090008@canonical.com> <53CF765E.7020802@vodafone.de> <53CF8010.9060809@amd.com> <53CF822E.7050601@amd.com> <53CF84C7.2020507@vodafone.de> <53CF8693.1040006@canonical.com> <53CF8AB1.2000009@amd.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed X-Originating-IP: [10.224.155.198] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:165.204.84.221;CTRY:US;IPV:NLI;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(6009001)(428002)(189002)(199002)(377454003)(51704005)(24454002)(74662001)(68736004)(19580395003)(23676002)(83322001)(110136001)(65816999)(79102001)(84676001)(99396002)(83506001)(74502001)(44976005)(21056001)(93886003)(19580405001)(33656002)(50466002)(36756003)(59896001)(85182001)(92566001)(85852003)(77982001)(87266999)(80316001)(83072002)(50986999)(54356999)(76176999)(92726001)(80022001)(65956001)(46102001)(65806001)(85306003)(47776003)(64706001)(86362001)(20776003)(102836001)(81342001)(81542001)(105586002)(107046002)(101416001)(97736001)(106466001)(87936001)(31966008)(85202003)(4396001)(76482001)(64126003)(95666004);DIR:OUT;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:CO1PR02MB046;H:atltwp01.amd.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent;MX:1;LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID: X-Forefront-PRVS: 028166BF91 Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is 165.204.84.221) smtp.mailfrom=Christian.Koenig@amd.com; X-OriginatorOrg: amd4.onmicrosoft.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 23.07.2014 12:52, schrieb Daniel Vetter: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Christian König > wrote: >>> And the dma-buf would still have fences belonging to both drivers, and it >>> would still call from outside the driver. >> >> Calling from outside the driver is fine as long as the driver can do >> everything necessary to complete it's work and isn't forced into any ugly >> hacks and things that are not 100% reliable. >> >> So I don't see much other approach as integrating recovery code for not >> firing interrupts and some kind of lockup handling into the fence code as >> well. > That approach doesn't really work at that well since every driver has > it's own reset semantics. And we're trying to move away from global > reset to fine-grained reset. So stop-the-world reset is out of > fashion, at least for i915. As you said, reset is normal in gpus and > we're trying to make reset less invasive. I really don't see a point > in imposing a reset scheme upon all drivers and I think you have about > as much motivation to convert radeon to the scheme used by i915 as > I'll have for converting to the one used by radeon. If it would fit at > all. Oh my! No, I didn't wanted to suggest any global reset infrastructure. My idea was more that the fence framework provides a fence->process_signaling callback that is periodically called after enable_signaling is called to trigger manual signal processing in the driver. This would both be suitable as a fallback in case of not working interrupts as well as a chance for any driver to do necessary lockup handling. Christian. > I guess for radeon we just have to add tons of insulation by punting > all callbacks to work items so that radeon can do whatever it wants. > Plus start a delayed_work based fallback when ->enable_signalling is > called to make sure we work on platforms that lack interrupts. > -Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/