* [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
@ 2017-11-22 17:26 Chris Wilson
2017-11-22 17:30 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-11-22 17:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx
We don't need struct_mutex to initialise userptr (it just allocates a
workqueue for itself etc), but we do need struct_mutex in
i915_gem_init() in order to feed requests onto the HW.
This should break the chain
[ 385.697902] ======================================================
[ 385.697907] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 385.697913] 4.14.0-CI-Patchwork_7234+ #1 Tainted: G U
[ 385.697917] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 385.697922] perf_pmu/2631 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 385.697927] (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff811bfe1e>] __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
[ 385.697941]
but task is already holding lock:
[ 385.697946] (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8116fe8c>] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested+0xbc/0x1d0
[ 385.697957]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 385.697963]
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 385.697970]
-> #4 (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}:
[ 385.697980] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
[ 385.697985] perf_event_init_cpu+0x5a/0x90
[ 385.697991] perf_event_init+0x178/0x1a4
[ 385.697997] start_kernel+0x27f/0x3f1
[ 385.698003] verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
[ 385.698006]
-> #3 (pmus_lock){+.+.}:
[ 385.698015] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
[ 385.698020] perf_event_init_cpu+0x21/0x90
[ 385.698025] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xca/0xc00
[ 385.698030] _cpu_up+0xa7/0x170
[ 385.698035] do_cpu_up+0x57/0x70
[ 385.698039] smp_init+0x62/0xa6
[ 385.698044] kernel_init_freeable+0x97/0x193
[ 385.698050] kernel_init+0xa/0x100
[ 385.698055] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
[ 385.698058]
-> #2 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
[ 385.698068] cpus_read_lock+0x39/0xa0
[ 385.698073] apply_workqueue_attrs+0x12/0x50
[ 385.698078] __alloc_workqueue_key+0x1d8/0x4d8
[ 385.698134] i915_gem_init_userptr+0x5f/0x80 [i915]
[ 385.698176] i915_gem_init+0x7c/0x390 [i915]
[ 385.698213] i915_driver_load+0x99e/0x15c0 [i915]
[ 385.698250] i915_pci_probe+0x33/0x90 [i915]
[ 385.698256] pci_device_probe+0xa1/0x130
[ 385.698262] driver_probe_device+0x293/0x440
[ 385.698267] __driver_attach+0xde/0xe0
[ 385.698272] bus_for_each_dev+0x5c/0x90
[ 385.698277] bus_add_driver+0x16d/0x260
[ 385.698282] driver_register+0x57/0xc0
[ 385.698287] do_one_initcall+0x3e/0x160
[ 385.698292] do_init_module+0x5b/0x1fa
[ 385.698297] load_module+0x2374/0x2dc0
[ 385.698302] SyS_finit_module+0xaa/0xe0
[ 385.698307] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
[ 385.698311]
-> #1 (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.}:
[ 385.698320] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
[ 385.698361] i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x4c/0x130 [i915]
[ 385.698403] i915_gem_fault+0x206/0x760 [i915]
[ 385.698409] __do_fault+0x1a/0x70
[ 385.698413] __handle_mm_fault+0x7c4/0xdb0
[ 385.698417] handle_mm_fault+0x154/0x300
[ 385.698440] __do_page_fault+0x2d6/0x570
[ 385.698445] page_fault+0x22/0x30
[ 385.698449]
-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
[ 385.698459] lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
[ 385.698464] __might_fault+0x68/0x90
[ 385.698470] _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
[ 385.698475] perf_read+0x1aa/0x290
[ 385.698480] __vfs_read+0x23/0x120
[ 385.698484] vfs_read+0xa3/0x150
[ 385.698488] SyS_read+0x45/0xb0
[ 385.698493] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
[ 385.698497]
other info that might help us debug this:
[ 385.698505] Chain exists of:
&mm->mmap_sem --> pmus_lock --> &cpuctx_mutex
[ 385.698517] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 385.698522] CPU0 CPU1
[ 385.698526] ---- ----
[ 385.698529] lock(&cpuctx_mutex);
[ 385.698553] lock(pmus_lock);
[ 385.698558] lock(&cpuctx_mutex);
[ 385.698564] lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
[ 385.698568]
*** DEADLOCK ***
[ 385.698574] 1 lock held by perf_pmu/2631:
[ 385.698578] #0: (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8116fe8c>] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested+0xbc/0x1d0
[ 385.698589]
stack backtrace:
[ 385.698595] CPU: 3 PID: 2631 Comm: perf_pmu Tainted: G U 4.14.0-CI-Patchwork_7234+ #1
[ 385.698602] Hardware name: /NUC6CAYB, BIOS AYAPLCEL.86A.0040.2017.0619.1722 06/19/2017
[ 385.698609] Call Trace:
[ 385.698615] dump_stack+0x5f/0x86
[ 385.698621] print_circular_bug.isra.18+0x1d0/0x2c0
[ 385.698627] __lock_acquire+0x19c3/0x1b60
[ 385.698634] ? generic_exec_single+0x77/0xe0
[ 385.698640] ? lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
[ 385.698644] lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
[ 385.698650] ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
[ 385.698655] __might_fault+0x68/0x90
[ 385.698660] ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
[ 385.698665] _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
[ 385.698670] perf_read+0x1aa/0x290
[ 385.698675] __vfs_read+0x23/0x120
[ 385.698682] ? __fget+0x101/0x1f0
[ 385.698686] vfs_read+0xa3/0x150
[ 385.698691] SyS_read+0x45/0xb0
[ 385.698696] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
[ 385.698701] RIP: 0033:0x7ff1c46876ed
[ 385.698705] RSP: 002b:00007fff13552f90 EFLAGS: 00000293 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000000
[ 385.698712] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: ffffc90000647ff0 RCX: 00007ff1c46876ed
[ 385.698718] RDX: 0000000000000010 RSI: 00007fff13552fa0 RDI: 0000000000000005
[ 385.698723] RBP: 000056063d300580 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000060
[ 385.698729] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000293 R12: 0000000000000046
[ 385.698734] R13: 00007fff13552c6f R14: 00007ff1c6279d00 R15: 00007ff1c6279a40
Testcase: igt/perf_pmu
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 11 +++++------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 21ca680e9e63..e03d6c2554e2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -5116,8 +5116,6 @@ int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
{
int ret;
- mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
-
/*
* We need to fallback to 4K pages since gvt gtt handling doesn't
* support huge page entries - we will need to check either hypervisor
@@ -5137,18 +5135,19 @@ int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
dev_priv->gt.cleanup_engine = intel_engine_cleanup;
}
+ ret = i915_gem_init_userptr(dev_priv);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
/* This is just a security blanket to placate dragons.
* On some systems, we very sporadically observe that the first TLBs
* used by the CS may be stale, despite us poking the TLB reset. If
* we hold the forcewake during initialisation these problems
* just magically go away.
*/
+ mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
- ret = i915_gem_init_userptr(dev_priv);
- if (ret)
- goto out_unlock;
-
ret = i915_gem_init_ggtt(dev_priv);
if (ret)
goto out_unlock;
--
2.15.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
2017-11-22 17:26 [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex Chris Wilson
@ 2017-11-22 17:30 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-11-22 18:37 ` Chris Wilson
2017-11-22 17:46 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2017-11-22 18:34 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2017-11-22 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, intel-gfx
On 22/11/2017 17:26, Chris Wilson wrote:
> We don't need struct_mutex to initialise userptr (it just allocates a
> workqueue for itself etc), but we do need struct_mutex in
> i915_gem_init() in order to feed requests onto the HW.
>
> This should break the chain
>
> [ 385.697902] ======================================================
> [ 385.697907] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 385.697913] 4.14.0-CI-Patchwork_7234+ #1 Tainted: G U
> [ 385.697917] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 385.697922] perf_pmu/2631 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 385.697927] (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff811bfe1e>] __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
> [ 385.697941]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 385.697946] (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8116fe8c>] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested+0xbc/0x1d0
> [ 385.697957]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [ 385.697963]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 385.697970]
> -> #4 (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}:
> [ 385.697980] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
> [ 385.697985] perf_event_init_cpu+0x5a/0x90
> [ 385.697991] perf_event_init+0x178/0x1a4
> [ 385.697997] start_kernel+0x27f/0x3f1
> [ 385.698003] verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
> [ 385.698006]
> -> #3 (pmus_lock){+.+.}:
> [ 385.698015] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
> [ 385.698020] perf_event_init_cpu+0x21/0x90
> [ 385.698025] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xca/0xc00
> [ 385.698030] _cpu_up+0xa7/0x170
> [ 385.698035] do_cpu_up+0x57/0x70
> [ 385.698039] smp_init+0x62/0xa6
> [ 385.698044] kernel_init_freeable+0x97/0x193
> [ 385.698050] kernel_init+0xa/0x100
> [ 385.698055] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
> [ 385.698058]
> -> #2 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
> [ 385.698068] cpus_read_lock+0x39/0xa0
> [ 385.698073] apply_workqueue_attrs+0x12/0x50
> [ 385.698078] __alloc_workqueue_key+0x1d8/0x4d8
> [ 385.698134] i915_gem_init_userptr+0x5f/0x80 [i915]
> [ 385.698176] i915_gem_init+0x7c/0x390 [i915]
> [ 385.698213] i915_driver_load+0x99e/0x15c0 [i915]
> [ 385.698250] i915_pci_probe+0x33/0x90 [i915]
> [ 385.698256] pci_device_probe+0xa1/0x130
> [ 385.698262] driver_probe_device+0x293/0x440
> [ 385.698267] __driver_attach+0xde/0xe0
> [ 385.698272] bus_for_each_dev+0x5c/0x90
> [ 385.698277] bus_add_driver+0x16d/0x260
> [ 385.698282] driver_register+0x57/0xc0
> [ 385.698287] do_one_initcall+0x3e/0x160
> [ 385.698292] do_init_module+0x5b/0x1fa
> [ 385.698297] load_module+0x2374/0x2dc0
> [ 385.698302] SyS_finit_module+0xaa/0xe0
> [ 385.698307] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
> [ 385.698311]
> -> #1 (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.}:
> [ 385.698320] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
> [ 385.698361] i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x4c/0x130 [i915]
> [ 385.698403] i915_gem_fault+0x206/0x760 [i915]
> [ 385.698409] __do_fault+0x1a/0x70
> [ 385.698413] __handle_mm_fault+0x7c4/0xdb0
> [ 385.698417] handle_mm_fault+0x154/0x300
> [ 385.698440] __do_page_fault+0x2d6/0x570
> [ 385.698445] page_fault+0x22/0x30
> [ 385.698449]
> -> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
> [ 385.698459] lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
> [ 385.698464] __might_fault+0x68/0x90
> [ 385.698470] _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
> [ 385.698475] perf_read+0x1aa/0x290
> [ 385.698480] __vfs_read+0x23/0x120
> [ 385.698484] vfs_read+0xa3/0x150
> [ 385.698488] SyS_read+0x45/0xb0
> [ 385.698493] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
> [ 385.698497]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [ 385.698505] Chain exists of:
> &mm->mmap_sem --> pmus_lock --> &cpuctx_mutex
>
> [ 385.698517] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 385.698522] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 385.698526] ---- ----
> [ 385.698529] lock(&cpuctx_mutex);
> [ 385.698553] lock(pmus_lock);
> [ 385.698558] lock(&cpuctx_mutex);
> [ 385.698564] lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
> [ 385.698568]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 385.698574] 1 lock held by perf_pmu/2631:
> [ 385.698578] #0: (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8116fe8c>] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested+0xbc/0x1d0
> [ 385.698589]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 385.698595] CPU: 3 PID: 2631 Comm: perf_pmu Tainted: G U 4.14.0-CI-Patchwork_7234+ #1
> [ 385.698602] Hardware name: /NUC6CAYB, BIOS AYAPLCEL.86A.0040.2017.0619.1722 06/19/2017
> [ 385.698609] Call Trace:
> [ 385.698615] dump_stack+0x5f/0x86
> [ 385.698621] print_circular_bug.isra.18+0x1d0/0x2c0
> [ 385.698627] __lock_acquire+0x19c3/0x1b60
> [ 385.698634] ? generic_exec_single+0x77/0xe0
> [ 385.698640] ? lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
> [ 385.698644] lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
> [ 385.698650] ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
> [ 385.698655] __might_fault+0x68/0x90
> [ 385.698660] ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
> [ 385.698665] _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
> [ 385.698670] perf_read+0x1aa/0x290
> [ 385.698675] __vfs_read+0x23/0x120
> [ 385.698682] ? __fget+0x101/0x1f0
> [ 385.698686] vfs_read+0xa3/0x150
> [ 385.698691] SyS_read+0x45/0xb0
> [ 385.698696] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
> [ 385.698701] RIP: 0033:0x7ff1c46876ed
> [ 385.698705] RSP: 002b:00007fff13552f90 EFLAGS: 00000293 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000000
> [ 385.698712] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: ffffc90000647ff0 RCX: 00007ff1c46876ed
> [ 385.698718] RDX: 0000000000000010 RSI: 00007fff13552fa0 RDI: 0000000000000005
> [ 385.698723] RBP: 000056063d300580 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000060
> [ 385.698729] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000293 R12: 0000000000000046
> [ 385.698734] R13: 00007fff13552c6f R14: 00007ff1c6279d00 R15: 00007ff1c6279a40
>
> Testcase: igt/perf_pmu
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 11 +++++------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index 21ca680e9e63..e03d6c2554e2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -5116,8 +5116,6 @@ int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
> -
> /*
> * We need to fallback to 4K pages since gvt gtt handling doesn't
> * support huge page entries - we will need to check either hypervisor
> @@ -5137,18 +5135,19 @@ int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> dev_priv->gt.cleanup_engine = intel_engine_cleanup;
> }
>
> + ret = i915_gem_init_userptr(dev_priv);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> /* This is just a security blanket to placate dragons.
> * On some systems, we very sporadically observe that the first TLBs
> * used by the CS may be stale, despite us poking the TLB reset. If
> * we hold the forcewake during initialisation these problems
> * just magically go away.
> */
> + mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
> intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
>
> - ret = i915_gem_init_userptr(dev_priv);
> - if (ret)
> - goto out_unlock;
> -
> ret = i915_gem_init_ggtt(dev_priv);
> if (ret)
> goto out_unlock;
>
Thanks for taking care of this. Pre-emptive r-b:
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
2017-11-22 17:26 [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex Chris Wilson
2017-11-22 17:30 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2017-11-22 17:46 ` Patchwork
2017-11-22 18:34 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-11-22 17:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/34243/
State : success
== Summary ==
Series 34243v1 drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/34243/revisions/1/mbox/
Test gem_ringfill:
Subgroup basic-default-hang:
dmesg-warn -> PASS (fi-blb-e6850) fdo#101600
fdo#101600 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101600
fi-bdw-5557u total:289 pass:268 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:21 time:443s
fi-bdw-gvtdvm total:289 pass:265 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24 time:459s
fi-blb-e6850 total:289 pass:224 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:65 time:381s
fi-bsw-n3050 total:289 pass:243 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:46 time:544s
fi-bwr-2160 total:289 pass:183 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:106 time:278s
fi-bxt-dsi total:289 pass:259 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:30 time:508s
fi-bxt-j4205 total:289 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time:507s
fi-byt-j1900 total:289 pass:254 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:35 time:500s
fi-byt-n2820 total:289 pass:250 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:39 time:493s
fi-cfl-s2 total:289 pass:263 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:26 time:607s
fi-elk-e7500 total:289 pass:229 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:60 time:424s
fi-gdg-551 total:289 pass:178 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:1 skip:109 time:265s
fi-glk-1 total:289 pass:261 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:28 time:541s
fi-hsw-4770 total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:428s
fi-hsw-4770r total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:442s
fi-ilk-650 total:289 pass:228 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:61 time:425s
fi-ivb-3520m total:289 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time:476s
fi-ivb-3770 total:289 pass:260 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:29 time:464s
fi-kbl-7500u total:289 pass:264 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24 time:484s
fi-kbl-7560u total:289 pass:270 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:19 time:531s
fi-kbl-7567u total:289 pass:269 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time:487s
fi-kbl-r total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:533s
fi-pnv-d510 total:289 pass:222 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:66 time:580s
fi-skl-6260u total:289 pass:269 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time:467s
fi-skl-6600u total:289 pass:262 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:27 time:546s
fi-skl-6700hq total:289 pass:263 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:26 time:568s
fi-skl-6700k total:289 pass:265 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24 time:536s
fi-skl-6770hq total:289 pass:269 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20 time:497s
fi-skl-gvtdvm total:289 pass:266 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:23 time:468s
fi-snb-2520m total:289 pass:250 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:39 time:571s
fi-snb-2600 total:289 pass:249 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:40 time:422s
Blacklisted hosts:
fi-cnl-y total:225 pass:200 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:24
fi-glk-dsi total:289 pass:259 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:30 time:492s
368de251cb3d8b5a69ea4e2731a2b53d329c8485 drm-tip: 2017y-11m-22d-11h-27m-26s UTC integration manifest
53685046f496 drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_7237/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
2017-11-22 17:26 [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex Chris Wilson
2017-11-22 17:30 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-11-22 17:46 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
@ 2017-11-22 18:34 ` Patchwork
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2017-11-22 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/34243/
State : success
== Summary ==
Test kms_flip:
Subgroup plain-flip-ts-check-interruptible:
fail -> PASS (shard-hsw) fdo#100368
Subgroup vblank-vs-suspend:
pass -> SKIP (shard-snb) fdo#103375
Test kms_frontbuffer_tracking:
Subgroup fbc-1p-offscren-pri-shrfb-draw-render:
pass -> FAIL (shard-snb) fdo#101623
Test kms_setmode:
Subgroup basic:
pass -> FAIL (shard-hsw) fdo#99912
fdo#100368 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100368
fdo#103375 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103375
fdo#101623 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=101623
fdo#99912 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99912
shard-hsw total:2632 pass:1504 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:16 skip:1110 time:9271s
shard-snb total:2667 pass:1307 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:17 skip:1342 time:8045s
Blacklisted hosts:
shard-apl total:2645 pass:1666 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:23 skip:954 time:13209s
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_7237/shards.html
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex
2017-11-22 17:30 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2017-11-22 18:37 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2017-11-22 18:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin, intel-gfx
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2017-11-22 17:30:52)
>
> On 22/11/2017 17:26, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > We don't need struct_mutex to initialise userptr (it just allocates a
> > workqueue for itself etc), but we do need struct_mutex in
> > i915_gem_init() in order to feed requests onto the HW.
> >
> > This should break the chain
> >
> > [ 385.697902] ======================================================
> > [ 385.697907] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > [ 385.697913] 4.14.0-CI-Patchwork_7234+ #1 Tainted: G U
> > [ 385.697917] ------------------------------------------------------
> > [ 385.697922] perf_pmu/2631 is trying to acquire lock:
> > [ 385.697927] (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: [<ffffffff811bfe1e>] __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
> > [ 385.697941]
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > [ 385.697946] (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8116fe8c>] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested+0xbc/0x1d0
> > [ 385.697957]
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >
> > [ 385.697963]
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > [ 385.697970]
> > -> #4 (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}:
> > [ 385.697980] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
> > [ 385.697985] perf_event_init_cpu+0x5a/0x90
> > [ 385.697991] perf_event_init+0x178/0x1a4
> > [ 385.697997] start_kernel+0x27f/0x3f1
> > [ 385.698003] verify_cpu+0x0/0xfb
> > [ 385.698006]
> > -> #3 (pmus_lock){+.+.}:
> > [ 385.698015] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
> > [ 385.698020] perf_event_init_cpu+0x21/0x90
> > [ 385.698025] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xca/0xc00
> > [ 385.698030] _cpu_up+0xa7/0x170
> > [ 385.698035] do_cpu_up+0x57/0x70
> > [ 385.698039] smp_init+0x62/0xa6
> > [ 385.698044] kernel_init_freeable+0x97/0x193
> > [ 385.698050] kernel_init+0xa/0x100
> > [ 385.698055] ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
> > [ 385.698058]
> > -> #2 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
> > [ 385.698068] cpus_read_lock+0x39/0xa0
> > [ 385.698073] apply_workqueue_attrs+0x12/0x50
> > [ 385.698078] __alloc_workqueue_key+0x1d8/0x4d8
> > [ 385.698134] i915_gem_init_userptr+0x5f/0x80 [i915]
> > [ 385.698176] i915_gem_init+0x7c/0x390 [i915]
> > [ 385.698213] i915_driver_load+0x99e/0x15c0 [i915]
> > [ 385.698250] i915_pci_probe+0x33/0x90 [i915]
> > [ 385.698256] pci_device_probe+0xa1/0x130
> > [ 385.698262] driver_probe_device+0x293/0x440
> > [ 385.698267] __driver_attach+0xde/0xe0
> > [ 385.698272] bus_for_each_dev+0x5c/0x90
> > [ 385.698277] bus_add_driver+0x16d/0x260
> > [ 385.698282] driver_register+0x57/0xc0
> > [ 385.698287] do_one_initcall+0x3e/0x160
> > [ 385.698292] do_init_module+0x5b/0x1fa
> > [ 385.698297] load_module+0x2374/0x2dc0
> > [ 385.698302] SyS_finit_module+0xaa/0xe0
> > [ 385.698307] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
> > [ 385.698311]
> > -> #1 (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.}:
> > [ 385.698320] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x9b0
> > [ 385.698361] i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x4c/0x130 [i915]
> > [ 385.698403] i915_gem_fault+0x206/0x760 [i915]
> > [ 385.698409] __do_fault+0x1a/0x70
> > [ 385.698413] __handle_mm_fault+0x7c4/0xdb0
> > [ 385.698417] handle_mm_fault+0x154/0x300
> > [ 385.698440] __do_page_fault+0x2d6/0x570
> > [ 385.698445] page_fault+0x22/0x30
> > [ 385.698449]
> > -> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
> > [ 385.698459] lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
> > [ 385.698464] __might_fault+0x68/0x90
> > [ 385.698470] _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
> > [ 385.698475] perf_read+0x1aa/0x290
> > [ 385.698480] __vfs_read+0x23/0x120
> > [ 385.698484] vfs_read+0xa3/0x150
> > [ 385.698488] SyS_read+0x45/0xb0
> > [ 385.698493] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
> > [ 385.698497]
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > [ 385.698505] Chain exists of:
> > &mm->mmap_sem --> pmus_lock --> &cpuctx_mutex
> >
> > [ 385.698517] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >
> > [ 385.698522] CPU0 CPU1
> > [ 385.698526] ---- ----
> > [ 385.698529] lock(&cpuctx_mutex);
> > [ 385.698553] lock(pmus_lock);
> > [ 385.698558] lock(&cpuctx_mutex);
> > [ 385.698564] lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
> > [ 385.698568]
> > *** DEADLOCK ***
> >
> > [ 385.698574] 1 lock held by perf_pmu/2631:
> > [ 385.698578] #0: (&cpuctx_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8116fe8c>] perf_event_ctx_lock_nested+0xbc/0x1d0
> > [ 385.698589]
> > stack backtrace:
> > [ 385.698595] CPU: 3 PID: 2631 Comm: perf_pmu Tainted: G U 4.14.0-CI-Patchwork_7234+ #1
> > [ 385.698602] Hardware name: /NUC6CAYB, BIOS AYAPLCEL.86A.0040.2017.0619.1722 06/19/2017
> > [ 385.698609] Call Trace:
> > [ 385.698615] dump_stack+0x5f/0x86
> > [ 385.698621] print_circular_bug.isra.18+0x1d0/0x2c0
> > [ 385.698627] __lock_acquire+0x19c3/0x1b60
> > [ 385.698634] ? generic_exec_single+0x77/0xe0
> > [ 385.698640] ? lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
> > [ 385.698644] lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
> > [ 385.698650] ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
> > [ 385.698655] __might_fault+0x68/0x90
> > [ 385.698660] ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
> > [ 385.698665] _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
> > [ 385.698670] perf_read+0x1aa/0x290
> > [ 385.698675] __vfs_read+0x23/0x120
> > [ 385.698682] ? __fget+0x101/0x1f0
> > [ 385.698686] vfs_read+0xa3/0x150
> > [ 385.698691] SyS_read+0x45/0xb0
> > [ 385.698696] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0xb1
> > [ 385.698701] RIP: 0033:0x7ff1c46876ed
> > [ 385.698705] RSP: 002b:00007fff13552f90 EFLAGS: 00000293 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000000
> > [ 385.698712] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: ffffc90000647ff0 RCX: 00007ff1c46876ed
> > [ 385.698718] RDX: 0000000000000010 RSI: 00007fff13552fa0 RDI: 0000000000000005
> > [ 385.698723] RBP: 000056063d300580 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000060
> > [ 385.698729] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000293 R12: 0000000000000046
> > [ 385.698734] R13: 00007fff13552c6f R14: 00007ff1c6279d00 R15: 00007ff1c6279a40
> >
> > Testcase: igt/perf_pmu
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 11 +++++------
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > index 21ca680e9e63..e03d6c2554e2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > @@ -5116,8 +5116,6 @@ int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > {
> > int ret;
> >
> > - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
> > -
> > /*
> > * We need to fallback to 4K pages since gvt gtt handling doesn't
> > * support huge page entries - we will need to check either hypervisor
> > @@ -5137,18 +5135,19 @@ int i915_gem_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > dev_priv->gt.cleanup_engine = intel_engine_cleanup;
> > }
> >
> > + ret = i915_gem_init_userptr(dev_priv);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > /* This is just a security blanket to placate dragons.
> > * On some systems, we very sporadically observe that the first TLBs
> > * used by the CS may be stale, despite us poking the TLB reset. If
> > * we hold the forcewake during initialisation these problems
> > * just magically go away.
> > */
> > + mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
> > intel_uncore_forcewake_get(dev_priv, FORCEWAKE_ALL);
> >
> > - ret = i915_gem_init_userptr(dev_priv);
> > - if (ret)
> > - goto out_unlock;
> > -
> > ret = i915_gem_init_ggtt(dev_priv);
> > if (ret)
> > goto out_unlock;
> >
>
> Thanks for taking care of this. Pre-emptive r-b:
>
> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
And CI came back green with no new lockdep, so pushed.
Thanks,
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-11-22 18:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-11-22 17:26 [PATCH] drm/i915: Call i915_gem_init_userptr() before taking struct_mutex Chris Wilson
2017-11-22 17:30 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2017-11-22 18:37 ` Chris Wilson
2017-11-22 17:46 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2017-11-22 18:34 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
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.