Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v3] drm/sched: implement dynamic job-flow control

[Luben Tuikov]

On 2023-10-27 12:31, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 16:23:24 +0200
> Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/27/23 10:25, Boris Brezillon wrote:
>>> Hi Danilo,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:13:00 +0200
>>> Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> Currently, job flow control is implemented simply by limiting the number
>>>> of jobs in flight. Therefore, a scheduler is initialized with a credit
>>>> limit that corresponds to the number of jobs which can be sent to the
>>>> hardware.
>>>>
>>>> This implies that for each job, drivers need to account for the maximum
>>>> job size possible in order to not overflow the ring buffer.
>>>>
>>>> However, there are drivers, such as Nouveau, where the job size has a
>>>> rather large range. For such drivers it can easily happen that job
>>>> submissions not even filling the ring by 1% can block subsequent
>>>> submissions, which, in the worst case, can lead to the ring run dry.
>>>>
>>>> In order to overcome this issue, allow for tracking the actual job size
>>>> instead of the number of jobs. Therefore, add a field to track a job's
>>>> credit count, which represents the number of credits a job contributes
>>>> to the scheduler's credit limit.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes in V2:
>>>> ==============
>>>>    - fixed up influence on scheduling fairness due to consideration of a job's
>>>>      size
>>>>      - If we reach a ready entity in drm_sched_select_entity() but can't actually
>>>>        queue a job from it due to size limitations, just give up and go to sleep
>>>>        until woken up due to a pending job finishing, rather than continue to try
>>>>        other entities.
>>>>    - added a callback to dynamically update a job's credits (Boris)  
>>>
>>> This callback seems controversial. I'd suggest dropping it, so the
>>> patch can be merged.  
>>
>> I don't think we should drop it just for the sake of moving forward. If there are objections
>> we'll discuss them. I've seen good reasons why the drivers you are working on require this,
>> while, following the discussion, I have *not* seen any reasons to drop it. It helps simplifying
>> driver code and doesn't introduce any complexity or overhead to existing drivers.
> 
> Up to you. I'm just saying, moving one step in the right direction is
> better than being stuck, and it's not like adding this callback in a
> follow-up patch is super complicated either. If you're confident that
> we can get all parties to agree on keeping this hook, fine by me.

I'd rather have it in now, as it is really *the vision* of this patch. There's no point
in pushing in something half-baked.
-- 
Regards,
Luben

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x4C15479431A334AF.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature