From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, miku@iki.fi
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix timeout with missed interrupts in __wait_seqno
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 14:48:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131212124847.GY10036@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1386687763-21777-1-git-send-email-mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 05:02:43PM +0200, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> Commit 094f9a54e355 ("drm/i915: Fix __wait_seqno to use true infinite
> timeouts") added support for __wait_seqno to detect missing interrupts and
> go around them by polling. As there is also timeout detection in
> __wait_seqno, the polling and timeout detection were done with the same
> timer.
>
> When there has been missed interrupts and polling is needed, the timer is
> set to trigger in (now + 1) jiffies in future, instead of the caller
> specified timeout.
>
> Now when io_schedule() returns, we calculate the jiffies left to timeout
> using the timer expiration value. As the current jiffies is now bound to be
> always equal or greater than the expiration value, the timeout_jiffies will
> become zero or negative and we return -ETIME to caller even tho the
> timeout was never reached.
>
> Fix this by decoupling timeout calculation from timer expiration.
>
> v2: Commit message with some sense in it (Chris Wilson)
>
> v3: add parenthesis on timeout_expire calculation
>
> v4: don't read jiffies without timeout (Chris Wilson)
>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 14 ++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index 92149bc..6d2e786 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -1017,7 +1017,7 @@ static int __wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno,
> drm_i915_private_t *dev_priv = ring->dev->dev_private;
> struct timespec before, now;
> DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
> - long timeout_jiffies;
> + unsigned long timeout_expire;
> int ret;
>
> WARN(dev_priv->pc8.irqs_disabled, "IRQs disabled\n");
> @@ -1025,7 +1025,7 @@ static int __wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno,
> if (i915_seqno_passed(ring->get_seqno(ring, true), seqno))
> return 0;
>
> - timeout_jiffies = timeout ? timespec_to_jiffies_timeout(timeout) : 1;
> + timeout_expire = timeout ? jiffies + timespec_to_jiffies_timeout(timeout) : 0;
>
> if (dev_priv->info->gen >= 6 && can_wait_boost(file_priv)) {
> gen6_rps_boost(dev_priv);
> @@ -1044,7 +1044,6 @@ static int __wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno,
> getrawmonotonic(&before);
> for (;;) {
> struct timer_list timer;
> - unsigned long expire;
>
> prepare_to_wait(&ring->irq_queue, &wait,
> interruptible ? TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE : TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> @@ -1070,23 +1069,22 @@ static int __wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno,
> break;
> }
>
> - if (timeout_jiffies <= 0) {
> + if (timeout && time_after_eq(jiffies, timeout_expire)) {
> ret = -ETIME;
> break;
> }
>
> timer.function = NULL;
> if (timeout || missed_irq(dev_priv, ring)) {
> + unsigned long expire;
> +
> setup_timer_on_stack(&timer, fake_irq, (unsigned long)current);
> - expire = jiffies + (missed_irq(dev_priv, ring) ? 1: timeout_jiffies);
> + expire = missed_irq(dev_priv, ring) ? jiffies + 1 : timeout_expire;
I guess we have very small race here if we get called w/ timeout==NULL, and
missed_irq() was true above but is no longer true here. At that point we would
set expire=0 and might end up waiting for quite a while. But that issue was
present already in the code before this patch and otherwise it all
looks good to me, so:
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> mod_timer(&timer, expire);
> }
>
> io_schedule();
>
> - if (timeout)
> - timeout_jiffies = expire - jiffies;
> -
> if (timer.function) {
> del_singleshot_timer_sync(&timer);
> destroy_timer_on_stack(&timer);
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-12 12:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-09 19:11 [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix timeout with missed interrupts in __wait_seqno Mika Kuoppala
2013-12-10 8:35 ` Mika Kuoppala
2013-12-10 12:14 ` Chris Wilson
2013-12-10 15:02 ` Mika Kuoppala
2013-12-12 12:48 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2013-12-12 14:28 ` Daniel Vetter
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=20131212124847.GY10036@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=miku@iki.fi \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.