| Message ID | 20241114111500.77358-1-tursulin@igalia.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] dma-fence: Use kernel's sort for merging fences | expand |
Am 14.11.24 um 12:14 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin: > From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com> > > One alternative to the fix Christian proposed in > https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20241024124159.4519-3-christian.koenig@amd.com/ > is to replace the rather complex open coded sorting loops with the kernel > standard sort followed by a context squashing pass. > > Proposed advantage of this would be readability but one concern Christian > raised was that there could be many fences, that they are typically mostly > sorted, and so the kernel's heap sort would be much worse by the proposed > algorithm. > > I had a look running some games and vkcube to see what are the typical > number of input fences. Tested scenarios: > > 1) Hogwarts Legacy under Gamescope > > 450 calls per second to __dma_fence_unwrap_merge. > > Percentages per number of fences buckets, before and after checking for > signalled status, sorting and flattening: > > N Before After > 0 0.91% > 1 69.40% > 2-3 28.72% 9.4% (90.6% resolved to one fence) > 4-5 0.93% > 6-9 0.03% > 10+ > > 2) Cyberpunk 2077 under Gamescope > > 1050 calls per second, amounting to 0.01% CPU time according to perf top. > > N Before After > 0 1.13% > 1 52.30% > 2-3 40.34% 55.57% > 4-5 1.46% 0.50% > 6-9 2.44% > 10+ 2.34% > > 3) vkcube under Plasma > > 90 calls per second. > > N Before After > 0 > 1 > 2-3 100% 0% (Ie. all resolved to a single fence) > 4-5 > 6-9 > 10+ > > In the case of vkcube all invocations in the 2-3 bucket were actually > just two input fences. > > From these numbers it looks like the heap sort should not be a > disadvantage, given how the dominant case is <= 2 input fences which heap > sort solves with just one compare and swap. (And for the case of one input > fence we have a fast path in the previous patch.) > > A complementary possibility is to implement a different sorting algorithm > under the same API as the kernel's sort() and so keep the simplicity, > potentially moving the new sort under lib/ if it would be found more > widely useful. > > v2: > * Hold on to fence references and reduce commentary. (Christian) > * Record and use latest signaled timestamp in the 2nd loop too. > * Consolidate zero or one fences fast paths. > > Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com> > Fixes: 245a4a7b531c ("dma-buf: generalize dma_fence unwrap & merging v3") > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/3617 > Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> > Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org> > Cc: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> > Cc: Friedrich Vock <friedrich.vock@gmx.de> > Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org > Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.0+ > --- > drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c | 129 ++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c > index 628af51c81af..26cad03340ce 100644 > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > #include <linux/dma-fence-chain.h> > #include <linux/dma-fence-unwrap.h> > #include <linux/slab.h> > +#include <linux/sort.h> > > /* Internal helper to start new array iteration, don't use directly */ > static struct dma_fence * > @@ -59,6 +60,25 @@ struct dma_fence *dma_fence_unwrap_next(struct dma_fence_unwrap *cursor) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_fence_unwrap_next); > > + > +static int fence_cmp(const void *_a, const void *_b) > +{ > + struct dma_fence *a = *(struct dma_fence **)_a; > + struct dma_fence *b = *(struct dma_fence **)_b; > + > + if (a->context < b->context) > + return -1; > + else if (a->context > b->context) > + return 1; > + > + if (dma_fence_is_later(b, a)) > + return -1; > + else if (dma_fence_is_later(a, b)) > + return 1; > + > + return 0; > +} > + > /* Implementation for the dma_fence_merge() marco, don't use directly */ > struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, > struct dma_fence **fences, > @@ -67,8 +87,7 @@ struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, > struct dma_fence_array *result; > struct dma_fence *tmp, **array; > ktime_t timestamp; > - unsigned int i; > - size_t count; > + int i, j, count; > > count = 0; > timestamp = ns_to_ktime(0); > @@ -96,78 +115,58 @@ struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, > if (!array) > return NULL; > > - /* > - * This trashes the input fence array and uses it as position for the > - * following merge loop. This works because the dma_fence_merge() > - * wrapper macro is creating this temporary array on the stack together > - * with the iterators. > - */ > - for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) > - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_first(fences[i], &iter[i]); > - > count = 0; > - do { > - unsigned int sel; > - > -restart: > - tmp = NULL; > - for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) { > - struct dma_fence *next; > - > - while (fences[i] && dma_fence_is_signaled(fences[i])) > - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[i]); > - > - next = fences[i]; > - if (!next) > - continue; > - > - /* > - * We can't guarantee that inpute fences are ordered by > - * context, but it is still quite likely when this > - * function is used multiple times. So attempt to order > - * the fences by context as we pass over them and merge > - * fences with the same context. > - */ > - if (!tmp || tmp->context > next->context) { > - tmp = next; > - sel = i; > - > - } else if (tmp->context < next->context) { > - continue; > - > - } else if (dma_fence_is_later(tmp, next)) { > - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[i]); > - goto restart; > + for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) { > + dma_fence_unwrap_for_each(tmp, &iter[i], fences[i]) { > + if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(tmp)) { > + array[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp); > } else { > - fences[sel] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[sel]); > - goto restart; > + ktime_t t = dma_fence_timestamp(tmp); > + > + if (ktime_after(t, timestamp)) > + timestamp = t; > } > } > + } > > - if (tmp) { > - array[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp); > - fences[sel] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[sel]); > + if (count == 0 || count == 1) > + goto return_fastpath; > + > + sort(array, count, sizeof(*array), fence_cmp, NULL); > + > + /* > + * Only keep the most recent fence for each context. > + */ > + j = 0; > + tmp = array[0]; > + for (i = 1; i < count; i++) { > + if (array[i]->context != tmp->context) > + array[j++] = tmp; > + else > + dma_fence_put(tmp); If I'm not completely mistaken that can result in dropping the first element but not assigning it again. E.g. array[0] is potentially invalid after the loop. > + tmp = array[i]; > + } > + if (j == 0 || tmp->context != array[j - 1]->context) { > + array[j++] = tmp; > + } Maybe adjust the sort criteria so that the highest seqno comes first. This reduces the whole loop to something like this: j = 0; for (i = 1; i < count; i++) { if (array[i]->context == array[j]->context) dma_fence_put(array[i]); else array[++j] = array[i]; } count = ++j; Regards, Christian. > + count = j; > + > + if (count > 1) { > + result = dma_fence_array_create(count, array, > + dma_fence_context_alloc(1), > + 1, false); > + if (!result) { > + tmp = NULL; > + goto return_tmp; > } > - } while (tmp); > - > - if (count == 0) { > - tmp = dma_fence_allocate_private_stub(ktime_get()); > - goto return_tmp; > + return &result->base; > } > > - if (count == 1) { > +return_fastpath: > + if (count == 0) > + tmp = dma_fence_allocate_private_stub(timestamp); > + else > tmp = array[0]; > - goto return_tmp; > - } > - > - result = dma_fence_array_create(count, array, > - dma_fence_context_alloc(1), > - 1, false); > - if (!result) { > - tmp = NULL; > - goto return_tmp; > - } > - return &result->base; > > return_tmp: > kfree(array);
On 14/11/2024 13:48, Christian König wrote: > Am 14.11.24 um 12:14 schrieb Tvrtko Ursulin: >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com> >> >> One alternative to the fix Christian proposed in >> https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20241024124159.4519-3-christian.koenig@amd.com/ >> is to replace the rather complex open coded sorting loops with the kernel >> standard sort followed by a context squashing pass. >> >> Proposed advantage of this would be readability but one concern Christian >> raised was that there could be many fences, that they are typically >> mostly >> sorted, and so the kernel's heap sort would be much worse by the proposed >> algorithm. >> >> I had a look running some games and vkcube to see what are the typical >> number of input fences. Tested scenarios: >> >> 1) Hogwarts Legacy under Gamescope >> >> 450 calls per second to __dma_fence_unwrap_merge. >> >> Percentages per number of fences buckets, before and after checking for >> signalled status, sorting and flattening: >> >> N Before After >> 0 0.91% >> 1 69.40% >> 2-3 28.72% 9.4% (90.6% resolved to one fence) >> 4-5 0.93% >> 6-9 0.03% >> 10+ >> >> 2) Cyberpunk 2077 under Gamescope >> >> 1050 calls per second, amounting to 0.01% CPU time according to perf top. >> >> N Before After >> 0 1.13% >> 1 52.30% >> 2-3 40.34% 55.57% >> 4-5 1.46% 0.50% >> 6-9 2.44% >> 10+ 2.34% >> >> 3) vkcube under Plasma >> >> 90 calls per second. >> >> N Before After >> 0 >> 1 >> 2-3 100% 0% (Ie. all resolved to a single fence) >> 4-5 >> 6-9 >> 10+ >> >> In the case of vkcube all invocations in the 2-3 bucket were actually >> just two input fences. >> >> From these numbers it looks like the heap sort should not be a >> disadvantage, given how the dominant case is <= 2 input fences which heap >> sort solves with just one compare and swap. (And for the case of one >> input >> fence we have a fast path in the previous patch.) >> >> A complementary possibility is to implement a different sorting algorithm >> under the same API as the kernel's sort() and so keep the simplicity, >> potentially moving the new sort under lib/ if it would be found more >> widely useful. >> >> v2: >> * Hold on to fence references and reduce commentary. (Christian) >> * Record and use latest signaled timestamp in the 2nd loop too. >> * Consolidate zero or one fences fast paths. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com> >> Fixes: 245a4a7b531c ("dma-buf: generalize dma_fence unwrap & merging v3") >> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/3617 >> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> >> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> >> Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org> >> Cc: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> >> Cc: Friedrich Vock <friedrich.vock@gmx.de> >> Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org >> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.0+ >> --- >> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c | 129 ++++++++++++++--------------- >> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c >> b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c >> index 628af51c81af..26cad03340ce 100644 >> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c >> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ >> #include <linux/dma-fence-chain.h> >> #include <linux/dma-fence-unwrap.h> >> #include <linux/slab.h> >> +#include <linux/sort.h> >> /* Internal helper to start new array iteration, don't use directly */ >> static struct dma_fence * >> @@ -59,6 +60,25 @@ struct dma_fence *dma_fence_unwrap_next(struct >> dma_fence_unwrap *cursor) >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_fence_unwrap_next); >> + >> +static int fence_cmp(const void *_a, const void *_b) >> +{ >> + struct dma_fence *a = *(struct dma_fence **)_a; >> + struct dma_fence *b = *(struct dma_fence **)_b; >> + >> + if (a->context < b->context) >> + return -1; >> + else if (a->context > b->context) >> + return 1; >> + >> + if (dma_fence_is_later(b, a)) >> + return -1; >> + else if (dma_fence_is_later(a, b)) >> + return 1; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> /* Implementation for the dma_fence_merge() marco, don't use >> directly */ >> struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, >> struct dma_fence **fences, >> @@ -67,8 +87,7 @@ struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned >> int num_fences, >> struct dma_fence_array *result; >> struct dma_fence *tmp, **array; >> ktime_t timestamp; >> - unsigned int i; >> - size_t count; >> + int i, j, count; >> count = 0; >> timestamp = ns_to_ktime(0); >> @@ -96,78 +115,58 @@ struct dma_fence >> *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, >> if (!array) >> return NULL; >> - /* >> - * This trashes the input fence array and uses it as position for >> the >> - * following merge loop. This works because the dma_fence_merge() >> - * wrapper macro is creating this temporary array on the stack >> together >> - * with the iterators. >> - */ >> - for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) >> - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_first(fences[i], &iter[i]); >> - >> count = 0; >> - do { >> - unsigned int sel; >> - >> -restart: >> - tmp = NULL; >> - for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) { >> - struct dma_fence *next; >> - >> - while (fences[i] && dma_fence_is_signaled(fences[i])) >> - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[i]); >> - >> - next = fences[i]; >> - if (!next) >> - continue; >> - >> - /* >> - * We can't guarantee that inpute fences are ordered by >> - * context, but it is still quite likely when this >> - * function is used multiple times. So attempt to order >> - * the fences by context as we pass over them and merge >> - * fences with the same context. >> - */ >> - if (!tmp || tmp->context > next->context) { >> - tmp = next; >> - sel = i; >> - >> - } else if (tmp->context < next->context) { >> - continue; >> - >> - } else if (dma_fence_is_later(tmp, next)) { >> - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[i]); >> - goto restart; >> + for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) { >> + dma_fence_unwrap_for_each(tmp, &iter[i], fences[i]) { >> + if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(tmp)) { >> + array[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp); >> } else { >> - fences[sel] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[sel]); >> - goto restart; >> + ktime_t t = dma_fence_timestamp(tmp); >> + >> + if (ktime_after(t, timestamp)) >> + timestamp = t; >> } >> } >> + } >> - if (tmp) { >> - array[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp); >> - fences[sel] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[sel]); >> + if (count == 0 || count == 1) >> + goto return_fastpath; >> + >> + sort(array, count, sizeof(*array), fence_cmp, NULL); >> + >> + /* >> + * Only keep the most recent fence for each context. >> + */ >> + j = 0; >> + tmp = array[0]; >> + for (i = 1; i < count; i++) { >> + if (array[i]->context != tmp->context) >> + array[j++] = tmp; >> + else >> + dma_fence_put(tmp); > > If I'm not completely mistaken that can result in dropping the first > element but not assigning it again. > > E.g. array[0] is potentially invalid after the loop. Hmm I don't see it but I could be blind. It only drops the reference for the previous (tmp) if the context is the same. When it finds a new context it saves the previous (tmp) into the first free slot (j++). > >> + tmp = array[i]; >> + } >> + if (j == 0 || tmp->context != array[j - 1]->context) { >> + array[j++] = tmp; >> + } Or if all fences are from the same context, or only the last input fence is different, it saves the last to the next free slot. > Maybe adjust the sort criteria so that the highest seqno comes first. > > This reduces the whole loop to something like this: > > j = 0; > for (i = 1; i < count; i++) { > if (array[i]->context == array[j]->context) > dma_fence_put(array[i]); > else > array[++j] = array[i]; > } > count = ++j; AFAICS it works and gets rid of the condition outside the loop I had. Very neat, thank you! Let me incorporate that, and also see if I can add some more test cases on top of your selftest to exercise more corner cases. Regards, Tvrtko >> + count = j; >> + >> + if (count > 1) { >> + result = dma_fence_array_create(count, array, >> + dma_fence_context_alloc(1), >> + 1, false); >> + if (!result) { >> + tmp = NULL; >> + goto return_tmp; >> } >> - } while (tmp); >> - >> - if (count == 0) { >> - tmp = dma_fence_allocate_private_stub(ktime_get()); >> - goto return_tmp; >> + return &result->base; >> } >> - if (count == 1) { >> +return_fastpath: >> + if (count == 0) >> + tmp = dma_fence_allocate_private_stub(timestamp); >> + else >> tmp = array[0]; >> - goto return_tmp; >> - } >> - >> - result = dma_fence_array_create(count, array, >> - dma_fence_context_alloc(1), >> - 1, false); >> - if (!result) { >> - tmp = NULL; >> - goto return_tmp; >> - } >> - return &result->base; >> return_tmp: >> kfree(array); >
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c index 628af51c81af..26cad03340ce 100644 --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-unwrap.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <linux/dma-fence-chain.h> #include <linux/dma-fence-unwrap.h> #include <linux/slab.h> +#include <linux/sort.h> /* Internal helper to start new array iteration, don't use directly */ static struct dma_fence * @@ -59,6 +60,25 @@ struct dma_fence *dma_fence_unwrap_next(struct dma_fence_unwrap *cursor) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_fence_unwrap_next); + +static int fence_cmp(const void *_a, const void *_b) +{ + struct dma_fence *a = *(struct dma_fence **)_a; + struct dma_fence *b = *(struct dma_fence **)_b; + + if (a->context < b->context) + return -1; + else if (a->context > b->context) + return 1; + + if (dma_fence_is_later(b, a)) + return -1; + else if (dma_fence_is_later(a, b)) + return 1; + + return 0; +} + /* Implementation for the dma_fence_merge() marco, don't use directly */ struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, struct dma_fence **fences, @@ -67,8 +87,7 @@ struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, struct dma_fence_array *result; struct dma_fence *tmp, **array; ktime_t timestamp; - unsigned int i; - size_t count; + int i, j, count; count = 0; timestamp = ns_to_ktime(0); @@ -96,78 +115,58 @@ struct dma_fence *__dma_fence_unwrap_merge(unsigned int num_fences, if (!array) return NULL; - /* - * This trashes the input fence array and uses it as position for the - * following merge loop. This works because the dma_fence_merge() - * wrapper macro is creating this temporary array on the stack together - * with the iterators. - */ - for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_first(fences[i], &iter[i]); - count = 0; - do { - unsigned int sel; - -restart: - tmp = NULL; - for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) { - struct dma_fence *next; - - while (fences[i] && dma_fence_is_signaled(fences[i])) - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[i]); - - next = fences[i]; - if (!next) - continue; - - /* - * We can't guarantee that inpute fences are ordered by - * context, but it is still quite likely when this - * function is used multiple times. So attempt to order - * the fences by context as we pass over them and merge - * fences with the same context. - */ - if (!tmp || tmp->context > next->context) { - tmp = next; - sel = i; - - } else if (tmp->context < next->context) { - continue; - - } else if (dma_fence_is_later(tmp, next)) { - fences[i] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[i]); - goto restart; + for (i = 0; i < num_fences; ++i) { + dma_fence_unwrap_for_each(tmp, &iter[i], fences[i]) { + if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(tmp)) { + array[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp); } else { - fences[sel] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[sel]); - goto restart; + ktime_t t = dma_fence_timestamp(tmp); + + if (ktime_after(t, timestamp)) + timestamp = t; } } + } - if (tmp) { - array[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp); - fences[sel] = dma_fence_unwrap_next(&iter[sel]); + if (count == 0 || count == 1) + goto return_fastpath; + + sort(array, count, sizeof(*array), fence_cmp, NULL); + + /* + * Only keep the most recent fence for each context. + */ + j = 0; + tmp = array[0]; + for (i = 1; i < count; i++) { + if (array[i]->context != tmp->context) + array[j++] = tmp; + else + dma_fence_put(tmp); + tmp = array[i]; + } + if (j == 0 || tmp->context != array[j - 1]->context) { + array[j++] = tmp; + } + count = j; + + if (count > 1) { + result = dma_fence_array_create(count, array, + dma_fence_context_alloc(1), + 1, false); + if (!result) { + tmp = NULL; + goto return_tmp; } - } while (tmp); - - if (count == 0) { - tmp = dma_fence_allocate_private_stub(ktime_get()); - goto return_tmp; + return &result->base; } - if (count == 1) { +return_fastpath: + if (count == 0) + tmp = dma_fence_allocate_private_stub(timestamp); + else tmp = array[0]; - goto return_tmp; - } - - result = dma_fence_array_create(count, array, - dma_fence_context_alloc(1), - 1, false); - if (!result) { - tmp = NULL; - goto return_tmp; - } - return &result->base; return_tmp: kfree(array);