All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: htejun@gmail.com
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com,
	rodrigo.vivi@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Rework work queue usage
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 09:13:54 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZgXBcpRv_FTIoq91@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <rfc2tu5zx5qd4sbgpd7rcqproacelziemigx5wrs7xyjmr2fb4@w6wsqxkcpvnr>

Hello,

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 02:02:47PM -0500, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 11:21:44AM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > Avoid sleeping or grabbing locks in work queues shared with the system.
> > Recent changes to work queues [1] have exposed deadlocks [2] in Xe.

Can you elaborate it a bit? I'm having a bit of hard time imagining how the
latest workqueue changes would have exposed deadlocks.

> I think we need some of this information in the commit message in patch
> 1. Because patch 1 simply says it's moving to a device private wq to
> avoid hogging the system one, but the issue is much more serious.
> 
> Also, is the "Fixes:"  really correct? It seems more like a regression
> from the wq changes and there could be other drivers showing similar
> issues now. But it could alos be my lack of understanding of the real
> issue.

I don't have enough context to tell whether this is a workqueue problem but
if so we should definitely fix workqueue.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-01 12:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-28 18:21 [PATCH 0/3] Rework work queue usage Matthew Brost
2024-03-28 18:21 ` [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: Use ordered wq for preempt fence waiting Matthew Brost
2024-03-28 18:56   ` Matt Roper
2024-03-28 19:00     ` Matthew Brost
2024-04-01 19:37       ` Matthew Brost
2024-03-28 18:21 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/xe: Use device, gt ordered work queues for resource cleanup Matthew Brost
2024-03-28 18:21 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Use ordered WQ for TLB invalidation fences Matthew Brost
2024-03-28 19:02 ` [PATCH 0/3] Rework work queue usage Lucas De Marchi
2024-03-28 19:13   ` htejun [this message]
2024-03-28 19:30     ` Matthew Brost
2024-03-28 19:40       ` Tejun Heo
2024-03-29 16:52         ` Matthew Brost
2024-03-29  1:59 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-03-29  2:00 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-03-29  2:00 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-03-29  2:12 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-03-29  2:15 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-03-29  2:16 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-03-29  2:53 ` ✗ CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork

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=ZgXBcpRv_FTIoq91@slm.duckdns.org \
    --to=htejun@gmail.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
    /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.