glx: Handle out-of-sequence swap completion events correctly. (v2)

The code for emitting INTEL_swap_events swap completion
events needs to translate from 32-Bit sbc on the wire to
64-Bit sbc for the events and handle wraparound accordingly.

It assumed that events would be sent by the server in the
order their corresponding swap requests were emitted from
the client, iow. sbc count should be always increasing. This
was correct for DRI2.

This is not always the case under the DRI3/Present backend,
where the Present extension can execute presents and send out
completion events in a different order than the submission
order of the present requests, due to client code specifying
targetMSC target vblank counts which are not strictly
monotonically increasing. This confused the wraparound
handling. This patch fixes the problem by handling 32-Bit
wraparound in both directions. As long as successive swap
completion events real 64-Bit sbc's don't differ by more
than 2^30, this should be able to do the right thing.

How this is supposed to work:

awire->sbc contains the low 32-Bits of the true 64-Bit sbc
of the current swap event, transmitted over the wire.

glxDraw->lastEventSbc contains the low 32-Bits of the 64-Bit
sbc of the most recently processed swap event.

glxDraw->eventSbcWrap is a 64-Bit offset which tracks the upper
32-Bits of the current sbc. The final 64-Bit output sbc
aevent->sbc is computed from the sum of awire->sbc and
glxDraw->eventSbcWrap.

Under DRI3/Present, swap completion events can be received
slightly out of order due to non-monotic targetMsc specified
by client code, e.g., present request submission:

Submission sbc:   1   2   3
targetMsc:        10  11  9

Reception of completion events:
Completion sbc:   3   1   2

The completion sequence 3, 1, 2 would confuse the old wraparound
handling made for DRI2 as 1 < 3 --> Assumes a 32-Bit wraparound
has happened when it hasn't.

The client can queue multiple present requests, in the case of
Mesa up to n requests for n-buffered rendering, e.g., n =  2-4 in
the current Mesa GLX DRI3/Present implementation. In the case of
direct Pixmap presents via xcb_present_pixmap() the number n is
limited by the amount of memory available.

We reasonably assume that the number of outstanding requests n is
much less than 2 billion due to memory contraints and common sense.
Therefore while the order of received sbc's can be a bit scrambled,
successive 64-Bit sbc's won't deviate by much, a given sbc may be
a few counts lower or higher than the previous received sbc.

Therefore any large difference between the incoming awire->sbc and
the last recorded glxDraw->lastEventSbc will be due to 32-Bit
wraparound and we need to adapt glxDraw->eventSbcWrap accordingly
to adjust the upper 32-Bits of the sbc.

Two cases, correponding to the two if-statements in the patch:

a) Previous sbc event was below the last 2^32 boundary, in the previous
glxDraw->eventSbcWrap epoch, the new sbc event is in the next 2^32
epoch, therefore the low 32-Bit awire->sbc wrapped around to zero,
or close to zero --> awire->sbc is apparently much lower than the
glxDraw->lastEventSbc recorded for the previous epoch

--> We need to increment glxDraw->eventSbcWrap by 2^32 to adjust
the current epoch to be one higher than the previous one.

--> Case a) also handles the old DRI2 behaviour.

b) Previous sbc event was above closest 2^32 boundary, but now a
late event from the previous 2^32 epoch arrives, with a true sbc
that belongs to the previous 2^32 segment, so the awire->sbc of
this late event has a high count close to 2^32, whereas
glxDraw->lastEventSbc is closer to zero --> awire->sbc is much
greater than glXDraw->lastEventSbc.

--> We need to decrement glxDraw->eventSbcWrap by 2^32 to adjust
the current epoch back to the previous lower epoch of this late
completion event.

We assume such a wraparound to a higher (a) epoch or lower (b)
epoch has happened if awire->sbc and glxDraw->lastEventSbc differ
by more than 2^30 counts, as such a difference can only happen
on wraparound, or if somehow 2^30 present requests would be pending
for a given drawable inside the server, which is rather unlikely.

v2: Explain the reason for this patch and the new wraparound handling
    much more extensive in commit message, no code change wrt. initial
    version.

Cc: "10.3 10.4 10.5" <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Mario Kleiner <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <[email protected]>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions