diff options
| author | Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> | 2019-01-23 16:51:55 +0300 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> | 2019-01-24 10:47:28 +0300 |
| commit | 2b24408158276faf0f4a71eb97a2364686d5b06c (patch) | |
| tree | 9d10a5c5725e08382aa5968a598efdf75991222d /drivers | |
| parent | 49a57857aeea06ca831043acbb0fa5e0f50602fd (diff) | |
| download | linux-2b24408158276faf0f4a71eb97a2364686d5b06c.tar.xz | |
drm/i915/execlists: Mark up priority boost on preemption
Record the priority boost we giving to the preempted client or else we
may end up in a situation where the priority queue no longer matches the
request priority order and so we can end up in an infinite loop of
preempting the same pair of requests.
Fixes: e9eaf82d97a2 ("drm/i915: Priority boost for waiting clients")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190123135155.21562-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
(cherry picked from commit 6e062b60b0b1bd82cac475e63cdb8c451647182b)
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers')
| -rw-r--r-- | drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 4 |
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c index 4796f40a6d4f..eab9341a5152 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c @@ -303,6 +303,7 @@ static void __unwind_incomplete_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *engine) */ if (!(prio & I915_PRIORITY_NEWCLIENT)) { prio |= I915_PRIORITY_NEWCLIENT; + active->sched.attr.priority = prio; list_move_tail(&active->sched.link, i915_sched_lookup_priolist(engine, prio)); } @@ -645,6 +646,9 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine) int i; priolist_for_each_request_consume(rq, rn, p, i) { + GEM_BUG_ON(last && + need_preempt(engine, last, rq_prio(rq))); + /* * Can we combine this request with the current port? * It has to be the same context/ringbuffer and not |