@@ -1116,8 +1116,10 @@ __unwind_incomplete_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(rq, rn,
&engine->active.requests,
sched.link) {
- if (i915_request_completed(rq))
- continue; /* XXX */
+ if (i915_request_completed(rq)) {
+ list_del_init(&rq->sched.link);
+ continue;
+ }
__i915_request_unsubmit(rq);
@@ -321,7 +321,8 @@ bool i915_request_retire(struct i915_request *rq)
* after removing the breadcrumb and signaling it, so that we do not
* inadvertently attach the breadcrumb to a completed request.
*/
- remove_from_engine(rq);
+ if (!list_empty(&rq->sched.link))
+ remove_from_engine(rq);
GEM_BUG_ON(!llist_empty(&rq->execute_cb));
__list_del_entry(&rq->link); /* poison neither prev/next (RCU walks) */
Since the introduction of preempt-to-busy, requests can complete in the background, even while they are not on the engine->active.requests list. As such, the engine->active.request list itself is not in strict retirement order, and we have to scan the entire list while unwinding to not miss any. However, if the request is completed we currently leave it on the list [until retirement], but we could just as simply remove it and stop treating it as active. We would only have to then traverse it once while unwinding in quick succession. Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 6 ++++-- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)