The dependency chain must be an acyclic graph. This is checked by the
swfence, but for sanity, also do a simple check that we do not corrupt
our list iteration in execlists_schedule() by a shallow dependency
cycle.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index 007aec9d95c9..8c9d6cef2482 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -1006,7 +1006,8 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct 
drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
        stack.signaler = &request->priotree;
        list_add(&stack.dfs_link, &dfs);
 
-       /* Recursively bump all dependent priorities to match the new request.
+       /*
+        * Recursively bump all dependent priorities to match the new request.
         *
         * A naive approach would be to use recursion:
         * static void update_priorities(struct i915_priotree *pt, prio) {
@@ -1026,12 +1027,15 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct 
drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
        list_for_each_entry_safe(dep, p, &dfs, dfs_link) {
                struct i915_priotree *pt = dep->signaler;
 
-               /* Within an engine, there can be no cycle, but we may
+               /*
+                * Within an engine, there can be no cycle, but we may
                 * refer to the same dependency chain multiple times
                 * (redundant dependencies are not eliminated) and across
                 * engines.
                 */
                list_for_each_entry(p, &pt->signalers_list, signal_link) {
+                       GEM_BUG_ON(p == dep); /* no cycles! */
+
                        if 
(i915_gem_request_completed(priotree_to_request(p->signaler)))
                                continue;
 
@@ -1043,7 +1047,8 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct 
drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
                list_safe_reset_next(dep, p, dfs_link);
        }
 
-       /* If we didn't need to bump any existing priorities, and we haven't
+       /*
+        * If we didn't need to bump any existing priorities, and we haven't
         * yet submitted this request (i.e. there is no potential race with
         * execlists_submit_request()), we can set our own priority and skip
         * acquiring the engine locks.
-- 
2.15.1

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to