From c0fa92ec8902492a599e6eabff9e3ef43d1afee6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 16:23:05 +0000
Subject: drm/i915: Protect request peeking with RCU
Git-commit: c0fa92ec8902492a599e6eabff9e3ef43d1afee6
Patch-mainline: v5.4
References: bsc#1152489

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: df403069029d ("drm/i915/execlists: Lift process_csb() out of the irq-off spinlock")
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
(cherry picked from commit 7d148635253328dda7cfe55d57e3c828e9564427)
Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit 8eb4704b124cbd44f189709959137d77063ecfa1)
(cherry picked from commit 7e27238e149ce4f00d9cd801fe3aa0ea55e986a2)
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Acked-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
index 7b84ebca2901..3eba8a2b39c2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scheduler.c
@@ -177,9 +177,37 @@ static inline int rq_prio(const struct i915_request *rq)
 	return rq->sched.attr.priority | __NO_PREEMPTION;
 }
 
-static void kick_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
+static inline bool need_preempt(int prio, int active)
 {
-	const struct i915_request *inflight = *engine->execlists.active;
+	/*
+	 * Allow preemption of low -> normal -> high, but we do
+	 * not allow low priority tasks to preempt other low priority
+	 * tasks under the impression that latency for low priority
+	 * tasks does not matter (as much as background throughput),
+	 * so kiss.
+	 */
+	return prio >= max(I915_PRIORITY_NORMAL, active);
+}
+
+static void kick_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
+			    const struct i915_request *rq,
+			    int prio)
+{
+	const struct i915_request *inflight;
+
+	/*
+	 * We only need to kick the tasklet once for the high priority
+	 * new context we add into the queue.
+	 */
+	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)
+		goto unlock;
 
 	/*
 	 * If we are already the currently executing context, don't
@@ -188,10 +216,15 @@ static void kick_submission(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
 	 * tasklet, i.e. we have not change the priority queue
 	 * sufficiently to oust the running context.
 	 */
-	if (!inflight || !i915_scheduler_need_preempt(prio, rq_prio(inflight)))
-		return;
+	if (inflight->hw_context == rq->hw_context)
+		goto unlock;
 
-	tasklet_hi_schedule(&engine->execlists.tasklet);
+	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,
@@ -317,13 +350,8 @@ static void __i915_schedule(struct i915_sched_node *node,
 			list_move_tail(&node->link, cache.priolist);
 		}
 
-		if (prio <= engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint)
-			continue;
-
-		engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint = prio;
-
 		/* Defer (tasklet) submission until after all of our updates. */
-		kick_submission(engine, prio);
+		kick_submission(engine, node_to_request(node), prio);
 	}
 
 	spin_unlock(&engine->active.lock);
-- 
2.28.0