Skip to content
Commit 93b71330 authored by Jason Ekstrand's avatar Jason Ekstrand Committed by Daniel Vetter
Browse files

drm/i915: Revert "drm/i915/gem: Asynchronous cmdparser"

This reverts 686c7c35 ("drm/i915/gem: Asynchronous cmdparser").  The
justification for this commit in the git history was a vague comment
about getting it out from under the struct_mutex.  While this may
improve perf for some workloads on Gen7 platforms where we rely on the
command parser for features such as indirect rendering, no numbers were
provided to prove such an improvement.  It claims to closed two
gitlab/bugzilla issues but with no explanation whatsoever as to why or
what bug it's fixing.

Meanwhile, by moving command parsing off to an async callback, it leaves
us with a problem of what to do on error.  When things were synchronous,
EXECBUFFER2 would fail with an error code if parsing failed.  When
moving it to async, we needed another way to handle that error and the
solution employed was to set an error on the dma_fence and then trust
that said error gets propagated to the client eventually.  Moving back
to synchronous will help us untangle the fence error propagation mess.

This also reverts most of 0edbb9ba

 ("drm/i915: Move cmd parser
pinning to execbuffer") which is a refactor of some of our allocation
paths for asynchronous parsing.  Now that everything is synchronous, we
don't need it.

v2 (Daniel Vetter):
 - Add stabel Cc and Fixes tag

Signed-off-by: default avatarJason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.6+
Fixes: 9e31c1fe

 ("drm/i915: Propagate errors on awaiting already signaled fences")
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarJon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@intel.com>
Acked-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210714193419.1459723-2-jason@jlekstrand.net
parent 1cbf731e
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment