From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@ursulin.net>
To: Natalie Vock <natalie.vock@gmx.de>,
Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>,
Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>,
Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@ffwll.ch>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] drm/ttm: Extract code for attempting allocation in a place
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 15:27:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <235fd4f7-dbb7-44c8-9bbc-f1d8297fb8b9@ursulin.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260225-dmemcg-aggressive-protect-v4-3-de847ab35184@gmx.de>
On 25/02/2026 12:10, Natalie Vock wrote:
> Move all code for attempting allocation for a specific place to
> ttm_bo_alloc_place. With subsequent patches, this logic is going to get
> more complicated, so it helps readability to have this separate.
>
> ttm_bo_alloc_at_place takes a pointer to a struct ttm_bo_alloc_state.
> This struct holds various state produced by the allocation (e.g. cgroup
> resource associated with the allocation) that the caller needs to keep
> track of (and potentially dispose of). This is just the limiting cgroup
> pool for now, but future patches will add more state needing to be tracked.
>
> ttm_bo_alloc_at_place also communicates via return codes if eviction
> using ttm_bo_evict_alloc should be attempted. This is preparation for
> attempting eviction in more cases than just force_space being set.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Natalie Vock <natalie.vock@gmx.de>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
> index acb9197db8798..48dbaaa46824c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
> @@ -489,6 +489,11 @@ int ttm_bo_evict_first(struct ttm_device *bdev, struct ttm_resource_manager *man
> return ret;
> }
>
> +struct ttm_bo_alloc_state {
> + /** @limit_pool: Which pool limit we should test against */
> + struct dmem_cgroup_pool_state *limit_pool;
> +};
> +
> /**
> * struct ttm_bo_evict_walk - Parameters for the evict walk.
> */
> @@ -504,12 +509,13 @@ struct ttm_bo_evict_walk {
> /** @evicted: Number of successful evictions. */
> unsigned long evicted;
>
> - /** @limit_pool: Which pool limit we should test against */
> - struct dmem_cgroup_pool_state *limit_pool;
> /** @try_low: Whether we should attempt to evict BO's with low watermark threshold */
> bool try_low;
> /** @hit_low: If we cannot evict a bo when @try_low is false (first pass) */
> bool hit_low;
> +
> + /** @alloc_state: State associated with the allocation attempt. */
> + struct ttm_bo_alloc_state *alloc_state;
> };
>
> static s64 ttm_bo_evict_cb(struct ttm_lru_walk *walk, struct ttm_buffer_object *bo)
> @@ -518,8 +524,9 @@ static s64 ttm_bo_evict_cb(struct ttm_lru_walk *walk, struct ttm_buffer_object *
> container_of(walk, typeof(*evict_walk), walk);
> s64 lret;
>
> - if (!dmem_cgroup_state_evict_valuable(evict_walk->limit_pool, bo->resource->css,
> - evict_walk->try_low, &evict_walk->hit_low))
> + if (!dmem_cgroup_state_evict_valuable(evict_walk->alloc_state->limit_pool,
> + bo->resource->css, evict_walk->try_low,
> + &evict_walk->hit_low))
> return 0;
>
> if (bo->pin_count || !bo->bdev->funcs->eviction_valuable(bo, evict_walk->place))
> @@ -561,7 +568,7 @@ static int ttm_bo_evict_alloc(struct ttm_device *bdev,
> struct ttm_operation_ctx *ctx,
> struct ww_acquire_ctx *ticket,
> struct ttm_resource **res,
> - struct dmem_cgroup_pool_state *limit_pool)
> + struct ttm_bo_alloc_state *state)
> {
> struct ttm_bo_evict_walk evict_walk = {
> .walk = {
> @@ -574,7 +581,7 @@ static int ttm_bo_evict_alloc(struct ttm_device *bdev,
> .place = place,
> .evictor = evictor,
> .res = res,
> - .limit_pool = limit_pool,
> + .alloc_state = state,
> };
> s64 lret;
>
> @@ -689,6 +696,58 @@ static int ttm_bo_add_pipelined_eviction_fences(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
> return dma_resv_reserve_fences(bo->base.resv, 1);
> }
>
> +
> +/**
> + * ttm_bo_alloc_at_place - Attempt allocating a BO's backing store in a place
> + *
> + * @bo: The buffer to allocate the backing store of
> + * @place: The place to attempt allocation in
> + * @ctx: ttm_operation_ctx associated with this allocation
> + * @force_space: If we should evict buffers to force space
> + * @res: On allocation success, the resulting struct ttm_resource.
> + * @alloc_state: Object holding allocation state such as charged cgroups.
> + *
> + * Returns:
> + * -EBUSY: No space available, but allocation should be retried with ttm_bo_evict_alloc.
> + * -ENOSPC: No space available, allocation should not be retried.
> + * -ERESTARTSYS: An interruptible sleep was interrupted by a signal.
> + *
> + */
> +static int ttm_bo_alloc_at_place(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
> + const struct ttm_place *place,
> + struct ttm_operation_ctx *ctx,
> + bool force_space,
> + struct ttm_resource **res,
> + struct ttm_bo_alloc_state *alloc_state)
> +{
> + bool may_evict;
> + int ret;
> +
> + may_evict = (force_space && place->mem_type != TTM_PL_SYSTEM);
> +
> + ret = ttm_resource_alloc(bo, place, res,
> + force_space ? &alloc_state->limit_pool : NULL);
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + /*
> + * -EAGAIN means the charge failed, which we treat like an
> + * allocation failure. Therefore, return an error code indicating
> + * the allocation failed - either -EBUSY if the allocation should
> + * be retried with eviction, or -ENOSPC if there should be no second
> + * attempt.
> + */
Ah having started reading 4/6 I see this comment actually is one patch
premature. So please fix that and keep my r-b.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> + if (ret == -EAGAIN)
> + return may_evict ? -EBUSY : -ENOSPC;
> +
> + if (ret == -ENOSPC && may_evict)
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * ttm_bo_alloc_resource - Allocate backing store for a BO
> *
> @@ -714,7 +773,9 @@ static int ttm_bo_alloc_resource(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
> bool force_space,
> struct ttm_resource **res)
> {
> + struct ttm_bo_alloc_state alloc_state = {0};
> struct ttm_device *bdev = bo->bdev;
> + struct ttm_resource_manager *man;
> struct ww_acquire_ctx *ticket;
> int i, ret;
>
> @@ -725,9 +786,6 @@ static int ttm_bo_alloc_resource(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>
> for (i = 0; i < placement->num_placement; ++i) {
> const struct ttm_place *place = &placement->placement[i];
> - struct dmem_cgroup_pool_state *limit_pool = NULL;
> - struct ttm_resource_manager *man;
> - bool may_evict;
>
> man = ttm_manager_type(bdev, place->mem_type);
> if (!man || !ttm_resource_manager_used(man))
> @@ -737,25 +795,26 @@ static int ttm_bo_alloc_resource(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
> TTM_PL_FLAG_FALLBACK))
> continue;
>
> - may_evict = (force_space && place->mem_type != TTM_PL_SYSTEM);
> - ret = ttm_resource_alloc(bo, place, res, force_space ? &limit_pool : NULL);
> - if (ret) {
> - if (ret != -ENOSPC && ret != -EAGAIN) {
> - dmem_cgroup_pool_state_put(limit_pool);
> - return ret;
> - }
> - if (!may_evict) {
> - dmem_cgroup_pool_state_put(limit_pool);
> - continue;
> - }
> + ret = ttm_bo_alloc_at_place(bo, place, ctx, force_space,
> + res, &alloc_state);
>
> + if (ret == -ENOSPC) {
> + dmem_cgroup_pool_state_put(alloc_state.limit_pool);
> + continue;
> + } else if (ret == -EBUSY) {
> ret = ttm_bo_evict_alloc(bdev, man, place, bo, ctx,
> - ticket, res, limit_pool);
> - dmem_cgroup_pool_state_put(limit_pool);
> - if (ret == -EBUSY)
> + ticket, res, &alloc_state);
> +
> + dmem_cgroup_pool_state_put(alloc_state.limit_pool);
> +
> + if (ret) {
> + if (ret != -EBUSY)
> + return ret;
> continue;
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + }
> + } else if (ret) {
> + dmem_cgroup_pool_state_put(alloc_state.limit_pool);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> ret = ttm_bo_add_pipelined_eviction_fences(bo, man, ctx->no_wait_gpu);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-25 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-25 12:10 [PATCH v4 0/6] cgroup/dmem,drm/ttm: Improve protection in contended cases Natalie Vock
2026-02-25 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] cgroup/dmem: Add queries for protection values Natalie Vock
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-25 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] cgroup/dmem: Add dmem_cgroup_common_ancestor helper Natalie Vock
2026-02-25 17:16 ` Tejun Heo
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-25 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] drm/ttm: Extract code for attempting allocation in a place Natalie Vock
2026-02-25 15:18 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-25 15:27 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2026-02-26 8:56 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-25 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] drm/ttm: Split cgroup charge and resource allocation Natalie Vock
2026-02-25 15:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-25 16:01 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-25 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] drm/ttm: Be more aggressive when allocating below protection limit Natalie Vock
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-25 12:10 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] drm/ttm: Use common ancestor of evictor and evictee as limit pool Natalie Vock
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-27 3:36 ` Claude review: cgroup/dmem,drm/ttm: Improve protection in contended cases Claude Code Review Bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=235fd4f7-dbb7-44c8-9bbc-f1d8297fb8b9@ursulin.net \
--to=tursulin@ursulin.net \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dev@lankhorst.se \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=natalie.vock@gmx.de \
--cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox