AMD-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Khatri, Sunil" <sukhatri@amd.com>
To: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Sunil Khatri" <sunil.khatri@amd.com>,
	"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Liang@rtg-sunil-navi33.amd.com,
	Prike <Prike.Liang@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/userq: add mutex lock/unlocked version of amdgpu_userq_put
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2026 16:44:13 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <df13f705-78c5-4e3a-86bf-8fc969b30d5c@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9481ee5c-fc2d-4b65-b3bc-cdcdb3180136@amd.com>


On 20-03-2026 04:27 pm, Christian König wrote:
> On 3/20/26 11:53, Khatri, Sunil wrote:
>> On 20-03-2026 03:43 pm, Christian König wrote:
>>> On 3/20/26 11:02, Khatri, Sunil wrote:
>>>> On 20-03-2026 03:16 pm, Christian König wrote:
>>>>> On 3/20/26 10:41, Sunil Khatri wrote:
>>>>>> There is a possibility of deadlock when last reference to a queue is
>>>>>> put in certain situations where mutex is already help when calling
>>>>>> the amdgpu_userq_destroy.
>>>>>    From functions
>>>>> As far as I can see that is illegal to begin with. Why are we doing that?
>>>> This is to fix the deadlock that prike shared and many other places where deadlock could still be caused.
>>>> There is a possibility of amdgpu_userq_put being called for last reference from amdgpu_userq_restore_worker or amdgpu_eviction_fence_suspend_worker via amdgpu_evf_mgr_shutdown
>>>> and all these functions already hold the userq_mutex and on last reference when destroy is called it again takes userq_mutex and causing deadlock.
>>>>
>>>> Thats why when we are dropping the reference we pass the information of the handled could be called with lock already taken and hence the handling.
>>> Well that sounds like completely broken handling.
>>>
>>> Why are dropping an userqueu reference while holding the lock in the first place?
>> we are doing at withing the locked state in most of the place in the code.
>> few examples:
>> static void amdgpu_userq_restore_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> {
>>      struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr = work_to_uq_mgr(work, resume_work.work);
>>      struct amdgpu_fpriv *fpriv = uq_mgr_to_fpriv(uq_mgr);
>>      struct dma_fence *ev_fence;
>>      int ret;
>>
>>      mutex_lock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>      ev_fence = amdgpu_evf_mgr_get_fence(&fpriv->evf_mgr);
>>      if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(ev_fence))
>>          goto unlock;
>>
>>      ret = amdgpu_userq_vm_validate(uq_mgr);
>>      if (ret) {
>>          drm_file_err(uq_mgr->file, "Failed to validate BOs to restore\n");
>>          goto unlock;
>>      }
>>
>>      // Here the restore all is going through all the queues one bye one by doing get and put
> That is ok, the question is why the heck is doing that get/put? See we need get/put because we are *not* holding the lock.
>
> When we are holding the lock no get/put is needed at all.
Got your point. In that case there is a bug in code and this could be 
resolved with clean up or doing get/put where queue mutex is not locked.
Will send the update here.

Regards
Sunil Khatri
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>> and doing the restore of each queue. Now during put if its last reference due to race with another thread in putting we will
>> call the destroy with locks taken which causes deadlock.
>>      ret = amdgpu_userq_restore_all(uq_mgr);
>>      if (ret) {
>>          drm_file_err(uq_mgr->file, "Failed to restore all queues\n");
>>          goto unlock;
>>      }
>>
>> unlock:
>>      mutex_unlock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>      dma_fence_put(ev_fence);
>> }
>>
>> Another example:
>> static void
>> amdgpu_eviction_fence_suspend_worker(struct work_struct *work)
>> {
>>      struct amdgpu_eviction_fence_mgr *evf_mgr =
>>          container_of(work, struct amdgpu_eviction_fence_mgr,
>>                   suspend_work);
>>      struct amdgpu_fpriv *fpriv =
>>          container_of(evf_mgr, struct amdgpu_fpriv, evf_mgr);
>>      struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr = &fpriv->userq_mgr;
>>      struct dma_fence *ev_fence;
>>      bool cookie;
>>
>>      mutex_lock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>
>>      /*
>>       * This is intentionally after taking the userq_mutex since we do
>>       * allocate memory while holding this lock, but only after ensuring that
>>       * the eviction fence is signaled.
>>       */
>>      cookie = dma_fence_begin_signalling();
>>
>>      ev_fence = amdgpu_evf_mgr_get_fence(evf_mgr);
>>
>>
>> /* Here in userq evict we do a ref get and put a various places while the mutex is already taken */
>>
>>      amdgpu_userq_evict(uq_mgr, !evf_mgr->shutdown);
>>
>>      /*
>>       * Signaling the eviction fence must be done while holding the
>>       * userq_mutex. Otherwise we won't resume the queues before issuing the
>>       * next fence.
>>       */
>>      dma_fence_signal(ev_fence);
>>      dma_fence_end_signalling(cookie);
>>      dma_fence_put(ev_fence);
>>      mutex_unlock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>
>> }
>>
>> Regards
>> Sunil.
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian.
>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Sunil khatri
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Christian.
>>>>>
>>>>>> So based on the thread where it could be
>>>>>> locked we pass the locked information in the destroy functionality
>>>>>> to avoid taking the lock again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: Liang, Prike <Prike.Liang@amd.com>
>>>>>> Suggested-by: Liang, Prike <Prike.Liang@amd.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sunil Khatri <sunil.khatri@amd.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c     | 52 +++++++++++++------
>>>>>>     drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.h     |  2 +-
>>>>>>     .../gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq_fence.c   |  4 +-
>>>>>>     3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
>>>>>> index ced9ade44be4..9482664e9c2c 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
>>>>>> @@ -617,13 +617,17 @@ amdgpu_userq_get_doorbell_index(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr,
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>       static int
>>>>>> -amdgpu_userq_destroy(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr, struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue)
>>>>>> +amdgpu_userq_destroy(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr, struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue,
>>>>>> +             bool locked)
>>>>>>     {
>>>>>>         struct amdgpu_device *adev = uq_mgr->adev;
>>>>>>         int r = 0;
>>>>>>     -    cancel_delayed_work_sync(&uq_mgr->resume_work);
>>>>>> +    /* It safe to unlock since we are in destroy and the queue ref is only this */
>>>>>> +    if (locked)
>>>>>> +        mutex_unlock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>>>>>     +    cancel_delayed_work_sync(&uq_mgr->resume_work);
>>>>>>         /* Cancel any pending hang detection work and cleanup */
>>>>>>         cancel_delayed_work_sync(&queue->hang_detect_work);
>>>>>>     @@ -657,13 +661,27 @@ amdgpu_userq_destroy(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr, struct amdgpu_usermode_que
>>>>>>             queue->state = AMDGPU_USERQ_STATE_HUNG;
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>         amdgpu_userq_cleanup(queue);
>>>>>> -    mutex_unlock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    if (!locked)
>>>>>> +        mutex_unlock(&uq_mgr->userq_mutex);
>>>>>>           pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(adev_to_drm(adev)->dev);
>>>>>>           return r;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>     +static void amdgpu_userq_kref_destroy_locked(struct kref *kref)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +    int r;
>>>>>> +    struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue =
>>>>>> +        container_of(kref, struct amdgpu_usermode_queue, refcount);
>>>>>> +    struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr = queue->userq_mgr;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    r = amdgpu_userq_destroy(uq_mgr, queue, true);
>>>>>> +    if (r)
>>>>>> +        drm_file_err(uq_mgr->file, "Failed to destroy usermode queue %d\n", r);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>     static void amdgpu_userq_kref_destroy(struct kref *kref)
>>>>>>     {
>>>>>>         int r;
>>>>>> @@ -671,7 +689,7 @@ static void amdgpu_userq_kref_destroy(struct kref *kref)
>>>>>>             container_of(kref, struct amdgpu_usermode_queue, refcount);
>>>>>>         struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr = queue->userq_mgr;
>>>>>>     -    r = amdgpu_userq_destroy(uq_mgr, queue);
>>>>>> +    r = amdgpu_userq_destroy(uq_mgr, queue, false);
>>>>>>         if (r)
>>>>>>             drm_file_err(uq_mgr->file, "Failed to destroy usermode queue %d\n", r);
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>> @@ -689,10 +707,14 @@ struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *amdgpu_userq_get(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr,
>>>>>>         return queue;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>     -void amdgpu_userq_put(struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue)
>>>>>> +void amdgpu_userq_put(struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue, bool locked)
>>>>>>     {
>>>>>> -    if (queue)
>>>>>> -        kref_put(&queue->refcount, amdgpu_userq_kref_destroy);
>>>>>> +    if (queue) {
>>>>>> +        if (locked)
>>>>>> +            kref_put(&queue->refcount, amdgpu_userq_kref_destroy_locked);
>>>>>> +        else
>>>>>> +            kref_put(&queue->refcount, amdgpu_userq_kref_destroy);
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>       static int amdgpu_userq_priority_permit(struct drm_file *filp,
>>>>>> @@ -978,7 +1000,7 @@ int amdgpu_userq_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>>>>             if (!queue)
>>>>>>                 return -ENOENT;
>>>>>>     -        amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +        amdgpu_userq_put(queue, false);
>>>>>>             break;
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>     @@ -1007,7 +1029,7 @@ amdgpu_userq_restore_all(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr)
>>>>>>                 drm_file_err(uq_mgr->file,
>>>>>>                          "trying restore queue without va mapping\n");
>>>>>>                 queue->state = AMDGPU_USERQ_STATE_INVALID_VA;
>>>>>> -            amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +            amdgpu_userq_put(queue, true);
>>>>>>                 continue;
>>>>>>             }
>>>>>>     @@ -1015,7 +1037,7 @@ amdgpu_userq_restore_all(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr)
>>>>>>             if (r)
>>>>>>                 ret = r;
>>>>>>     -        amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +        amdgpu_userq_put(queue, true);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>           if (ret)
>>>>>> @@ -1258,7 +1280,7 @@ amdgpu_userq_evict_all(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr)
>>>>>>             r = amdgpu_userq_preempt_helper(queue);
>>>>>>             if (r)
>>>>>>                 ret = r;
>>>>>> -        amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +        amdgpu_userq_put(queue, true);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>           if (ret)
>>>>>> @@ -1298,17 +1320,17 @@ amdgpu_userq_wait_for_signal(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr)
>>>>>>             struct dma_fence *f = queue->last_fence;
>>>>>>               if (!f || dma_fence_is_signaled(f)) {
>>>>>> -            amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +            amdgpu_userq_put(queue, true);
>>>>>>                 continue;
>>>>>>             }
>>>>>>             ret = dma_fence_wait_timeout(f, true, msecs_to_jiffies(100));
>>>>>>             if (ret <= 0) {
>>>>>>                 drm_file_err(uq_mgr->file, "Timed out waiting for fence=%llu:%llu\n",
>>>>>>                          f->context, f->seqno);
>>>>>> -            amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +            amdgpu_userq_put(queue, true);
>>>>>>                 return -ETIMEDOUT;
>>>>>>             }
>>>>>> -        amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +        amdgpu_userq_put(queue, true);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>           return 0;
>>>>>> @@ -1366,7 +1388,7 @@ void amdgpu_userq_mgr_fini(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *userq_mgr)
>>>>>>             if (!queue)
>>>>>>                 break;
>>>>>>     -        amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +        amdgpu_userq_put(queue, false);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>           xa_destroy(&userq_mgr->userq_xa);
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.h
>>>>>> index f0abc16d02cc..2a496e74ec6a 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.h
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.h
>>>>>> @@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ struct amdgpu_db_info {
>>>>>>     };
>>>>>>       struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *amdgpu_userq_get(struct amdgpu_userq_mgr *uq_mgr, u32 qid);
>>>>>> -void amdgpu_userq_put(struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue);
>>>>>> +void amdgpu_userq_put(struct amdgpu_usermode_queue *queue, bool locked);
>>>>>>       int amdgpu_userq_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *filp);
>>>>>>     diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq_fence.c
>>>>>> index 18390d37a7e0..10e08cb6bd13 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq_fence.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq_fence.c
>>>>>> @@ -612,7 +612,7 @@ int amdgpu_userq_signal_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>>>>         kfree(syncobj_handles);
>>>>>>           if (queue)
>>>>>> -        amdgpu_userq_put(queue);
>>>>>> +        amdgpu_userq_put(queue, false);
>>>>>>           return r;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>> @@ -914,7 +914,7 @@ amdgpu_userq_wait_return_fence_info(struct drm_file *filp,
>>>>>>             r = 0;
>>>>>>       put_waitq:
>>>>>> -    amdgpu_userq_put(waitq);
>>>>>> +    amdgpu_userq_put(waitq, false);
>>>>>>       free_fences:
>>>>>>         while (num_fences--)

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-20 11:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-20  9:41 [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/userq: add mutex lock/unlocked version of amdgpu_userq_put Sunil Khatri
2026-03-20  9:46 ` Christian König
2026-03-20 10:02   ` Khatri, Sunil
2026-03-20 10:13     ` Christian König
2026-03-20 10:53       ` Khatri, Sunil
2026-03-20 10:57         ` Christian König
2026-03-20 11:14           ` Khatri, Sunil [this message]
2026-03-20 12:10             ` Khatri, Sunil
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-03-20  9:43 Sunil Khatri

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=df13f705-78c5-4e3a-86bf-8fc969b30d5c@amd.com \
    --to=sukhatri@amd.com \
    --cc=Liang@rtg-sunil-navi33.amd.com \
    --cc=Prike.Liang@amd.com \
    --cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
    --cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=sunil.khatri@amd.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox