@@ -1839,11 +1839,9 @@ need_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, const struct i915_request *rq)
if (!intel_engine_has_timeslices(engine))
return false;
- if (list_is_last(&rq->sched.link, &engine->active.requests))
- return false;
-
- hint = max(rq_prio(list_next_entry(rq, sched.link)),
- engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint);
+ hint = engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint;
+ if (!list_is_last(&rq->sched.link, &engine->active.requests))
+ hint = max(hint, rq_prio(list_next_entry(rq, sched.link)));
return hint >= effective_prio(rq);
}
@@ -1885,6 +1883,18 @@ static void set_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
set_timer_ms(&engine->execlists.timer, active_timeslice(engine));
}
+static void start_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+{
+ struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists = &engine->execlists;
+
+ execlists->switch_priority_hint = execlists->queue_priority_hint;
+
+ if (timer_pending(&execlists->timer))
+ return;
+
+ set_timer_ms(&execlists->timer, timeslice(engine));
+}
+
static void record_preemption(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
{
(void)I915_SELFTEST_ONLY(execlists->preempt_hang.count++);
@@ -2048,11 +2058,7 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
* Even if ELSP[1] is occupied and not worthy
* of timeslices, our queue might be.
*/
- if (!execlists->timer.expires &&
- need_timeslice(engine, last))
- set_timer_ms(&execlists->timer,
- timeslice(engine));
-
+ start_timeslice(engine);
return;
}
}
@@ -2087,7 +2093,8 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
if (last && !can_merge_rq(last, rq)) {
spin_unlock(&ve->base.active.lock);
- return; /* leave this for another */
+ start_timeslice(engine);
+ return; /* leave this for another sibling */
}
ENGINE_TRACE(engine,
If we stop filling the ELSP due to an incompatible virtual engine request, check if we should enable the timeslice on behalf of the queue. This fixes the case where we are inspecting the last->next element when we know that the last element is the last request in the execution queue, and so decided we did not need to enable timeslicing despite the intent to do so! Fixes: 8ee36e048c98 ("drm/i915/execlists: Minimalistic timeslicing") 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> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.4+ Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200306113012.3184606-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk (cherry picked from commit 3df2deed411e0f1b7312baf0139aab8bba4c0410) --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Corporation (UK) Limited Registered No. 1134945 (England) Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ VAT No: 860 2173 47 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.