All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Mohammed Thasleem <mohammed.thasleem@intel.com>,
	<stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/dmc: fix an unlikely NULL pointer deference at probe
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 15:02:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aTGGThc98Il6FCTC@ideak-desk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7bfb6dabe5bf83028f695d4d248597b721ce0e0c@intel.com>

On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 01:30:27PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2025, Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 10:13:44AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2025, Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 11:24:42PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, Dec 02, 2025 at 08:39:50PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> >> > intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count() oopses when DMC hasn't been
> >> >> > initialized, and dmc is thus NULL.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > That would be the case when the call path is
> >> >> > intel_power_domains_init_hw() -> {skl,bxt,icl}_display_core_init() ->
> >> >> > gen9_set_dc_state() -> intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count(), as
> >> >> > intel_power_domains_init_hw() is called *before* intel_dmc_init().
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > However, gen9_set_dc_state() calls intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count()
> >> >> > conditionally, depending on the current and target DC states. At probe,
> >> >> > the target is disabled, but if DC6 is enabled, the function is called,
> >> >> > and an oops follows. Apparently it's quite unlikely that DC6 is enabled
> >> >> > at probe, as we haven't seen this failure mode before.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Add NULL checks and switch the dmc->display references to just display.
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Fixes: 88c1f9a4d36d ("drm/i915/dmc: Create debugfs entry for dc6 counter")
> >> >> > Cc: Mohammed Thasleem <mohammed.thasleem@intel.com>
> >> >> > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> >> >> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.16+
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > Rare case, but this may also throw off the rc6 counting in debugfs when
> >> >> > it does happen.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Yes, I missed the case where the driver is being loaded while DC6 is
> >> >> enabled, this is what happens for the reporter:
> >> >> 
> >> >> i915 0000:00:04.0: [drm] *ERROR* DC state mismatch (0x0 -> 0x2)
> >> >> 
> >> >> That's odd, as DC6 requires the DMC firmware, which - if it's indeed
> >> >> loaded by BIOS for instance - will be overwritten by the driver, not a
> >> >> well specified sequence (even though the driver is trying to handle it
> >> >> correctly by disabling any active firmware handler).
> >> >> 
> >> >> But as you pointed out this would also throw off the cooked-up DC6
> >> >> counter tracking,
> >> >
> >> > Actually the patch would keep the counter working, as the counter
> >> > wouldn't be updated in the dmc==NULL case. However I still think the
> >> > correct fix would be to check the correct DC state, which from the POV
> >> > of the counter tracking is the driver's version of the state, not the HW
> >> > state.
> >> 
> >> One thing I failed to mention is that this happens in a KASAN run in
> >> QEMU. So I'm kind of not surprised we haven't hit this before. And it
> >> impacts the deductions about the DC state.
> >
> > Ok, it's strange why QEMU decides to initialize the DC_STATE_EN register
> > to a non-zero value then. But in any case the driver should handle it.
> >
> >> I'm not quite sure what exactly you're suggesting, maybe a draft patch
> >> would communicate the idea better than plain English? ;)
> >
> > intel_dmc_get_dc6_allowed_count() still needs to check for dmc==NULL, as
> > the debugfs entry can be read at any point. With that, what I meant is:
> >
> > in gen9_set_dc_state():
> > ...
> > -       dc6_was_enabled = val & DC_STATE_EN_UPTO_DC6;
> > +       dc6_was_enabled = power_domains->dc_state & DC_STATE_EN_UPTO_DC6;
> 
> I still don't understand why we can trust our own value rather than
> what's in the hardware in this case.

The BIOS/FW can set random flags in the register, as in the above case,
so it can't be trusted. The counter update ending the tracking of the
duration of a DC6 enabled state only works if the driver did in fact
enable DC6 previously and has started the tracking accordingly. This is
only guaranteed if the driver has set DC_STATE_EN_UPTO_DC6 in
power_domains->dc_state, the corrsponding HW flag doesn't guarantee it.

> For resume, we even call gen9_sanitize_dc_state(), but not for probe.

After system suspend, the driver enabling DC9 by setting the
corrsponding DC9 flag in the DC_STATE_EN register, the HW/firmware will
disable DC9 while resuming. The SW version of the DC state will be
updated accordingly in the above function to reflect the disabled DC9
state.

> > ...
> >
> > in intel_dmc_get_dc6_allowed_count():
> > ...
> >         if (DISPLAY_VER(display) < 14)
> >                 return false;
> >  
> > +       if (!dmc) {
> > +               *count = 0;
> > +               return true;
> > +       }
> > +
> 
> This seems neat but is overkill. dmc is never NULL here, but I added the
> check for completeness.

intel_dmc_get_dc6_allowed_count() shouldn't fall back on DISPLAY_VER>=14
to report the DC6 residency in a way that only works for older
platforms. Hence the function should return true for DISPLAY_VER>=14.

> It's the intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count() that's more fragile, and I
> want that to have the !dmc check, instead of relying on the subtle
> dependency on power_domains->dc_state.

The counter tracking should depend on the power_domians->dc_state SW
state as described above, so that's the correct thing to do there.
dmc==NULL in intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count() would be only a bug in
the driver, if you wanted to check for that it should be a
WARN_ON(!dmc) check.

> >         mutex_lock(&power_domains->lock);
> > -       dc6_enabled = intel_de_read(display, DC_STATE_EN) &
> > -                     DC_STATE_EN_UPTO_DC6;
> > +       dc6_enabled = power_domains->dc_state & DC_STATE_EN_UPTO_DC6;
> > ...
> >
> >> Anyway, I think "not oopsing" is a lot better than "inaccurate DC
> >> counters in debugfs".
> >
> > Agreed, the above would ensure both.
> >
> >> 
> >> BR,
> >> Jani.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> >
> >> >> so could instead the counter update depend on the
> >> >> driver's DC state instead of the HW state? I.e. set
> >> >> gen9_set_dc_state()/dc6_was_enabled,
> >> >> intel_dmc_get_dc6_allowed_count()/dc6_enable if power_domains->dc_state
> >> >> says that DC6 was indeed enabled by the driver (instead of checking the
> >> >> HW state).
> >> >> 
> >> >> That would fix the reporter's oops when calling
> >> >> intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count(start_tracking=false), by not calling
> >> >> it if the driver hasn't actually enabled DC6 and it would also keep the
> >> >> DC6 counter tracking correct.
> >> >> 
> >> >> intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count(start_tracking=true) would be also
> >> >> guaranteed to be called only once the firmware is loaded, as until that
> >> >> point enabling DC6 is blocked (by holding a reference on the DC_off
> >> >> power well).
> >> >> 
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c | 6 +++---
> >> >> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c
> >> >> > index 2fb6fec6dc99..169bbbc91f6d 100644
> >> >> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c
> >> >> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dmc.c
> >> >> > @@ -1570,10 +1570,10 @@ void intel_dmc_update_dc6_allowed_count(struct intel_display *display,
> >> >> >  	struct intel_dmc *dmc = display_to_dmc(display);
> >> >> >  	u32 dc5_cur_count;
> >> >> >  
> >> >> > -	if (DISPLAY_VER(dmc->display) < 14)
> >> >> > +	if (!dmc || DISPLAY_VER(display) < 14)
> >> >> >  		return;
> >> >> >  
> >> >> > -	dc5_cur_count = intel_de_read(dmc->display, DG1_DMC_DEBUG_DC5_COUNT);
> >> >> > +	dc5_cur_count = intel_de_read(display, DG1_DMC_DEBUG_DC5_COUNT);
> >> >> >  
> >> >> >  	if (!start_tracking)
> >> >> >  		dmc->dc6_allowed.count += dc5_cur_count - dmc->dc6_allowed.dc5_start;
> >> >> > @@ -1587,7 +1587,7 @@ static bool intel_dmc_get_dc6_allowed_count(struct intel_display *display, u32 *
> >> >> >  	struct intel_dmc *dmc = display_to_dmc(display);
> >> >> >  	bool dc6_enabled;
> >> >> >  
> >> >> > -	if (DISPLAY_VER(display) < 14)
> >> >> > +	if (!dmc || DISPLAY_VER(display) < 14)
> >> >> >  		return false;
> >> >> >  
> >> >> >  	mutex_lock(&power_domains->lock);
> >> >> > -- 
> >> >> > 2.47.3
> >> >> > 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Jani Nikula, Intel
> 
> -- 
> Jani Nikula, Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2025-12-04 13:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-02 18:39 [PATCH] drm/i915/dmc: fix an unlikely NULL pointer deference at probe Jani Nikula
2025-12-02 19:00 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for " Patchwork
2025-12-02 20:13 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-12-02 21:24 ` [PATCH] " Imre Deak
2025-12-02 21:35   ` Imre Deak
2025-12-03  8:13     ` Jani Nikula
2025-12-03 10:38       ` Imre Deak
2025-12-04 11:30         ` Jani Nikula
2025-12-04 13:02           ` Imre Deak [this message]
2026-01-07 11:16             ` Jani Nikula
2025-12-02 22:38 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2025-12-03  3:37 ` ✓ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2025-12-04 22:20 ` ✓ i915.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2026-03-02 17:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Imre Deak
2026-03-03  2:44   ` Tao Liu
2026-03-06 10:12   ` Jani Nikula
2026-03-06 14:57     ` Imre Deak

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=aTGGThc98Il6FCTC@ideak-desk \
    --to=imre.deak@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
    --cc=mohammed.thasleem@intel.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.