Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
drm/i915: Protect request peeking with RCU
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Since the execlists_active() is no longer protected by the
engine->active.lock, we need to protect the request pointer with RCU to
prevent it being freed as we evaluate whether or not we need to preempt.

Fixes: df40306 ("drm/i915/execlists: Lift process_csb() out of the irq-off spinlock")
Fixes: 13ed13a ("drm/i915: Don't set queue_priority_hint if we don't kick the submission")
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>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191104090158.2959-2-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
  • Loading branch information
Chris Wilson committed Nov 4, 2019
1 parent 83c55ee commit 7d14863
Showing 1 changed file with 7 additions and 2 deletions.
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -202,21 +202,26 @@ static void kick_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
if (prio <= engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint)
return;

rcu_read_lock();

/* Nothing currently active? We're overdue for a submission! */
inflight = execlists_active(&engine->execlists);
if (!inflight)
return;
goto unlock;

/*
* If we are already the currently executing context, don't
* bother evaluating if we should preempt ourselves.
*/
if (inflight->hw_context == rq->hw_context)
return;
goto unlock;

engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint = prio;
if (need_preempt(prio, rq_prio(inflight)))
tasklet_hi_schedule(&engine->execlists.tasklet);

unlock:
rcu_read_unlock();
}

static void __i915_schedule(struct i915_sched_node *node,
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 7d14863

Please sign in to comment.