From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Nicolas Frattaroli" <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] drm/panthor: Revisit reqs_lock handling in flush/reset paths
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 12:02:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260730120229.9EC5F1F00A3E@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260730-panthor-cache-flush-fix-v2-2-28790478bfff@collabora.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Race condition between the threaded IRQ handler and the wait timeout logic causes spurious GPU resets.
--
--- Patch [2]: [PATCH v2 2/3] drm/panthor: Revisit reqs_lock handling in flush/reset paths ---
commit ec14154f1ff35bca85396f0f6f71d7d7b1d6eb6d
Author: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
drm/panthor: Revisit reqs_lock handling in flush/reset paths
The patch updates the handling of reqs_lock in panthor_gpu_flush_caches() and
panthor_gpu_soft_reset(). It replaces wait_event_timeout() with
wait_event_lock_timeout(), and uses spin_lock() instead of spin_lock_irqsave()
since the lock is not acquired in an atomic context.
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_gpu.c
> index e52c5675981f5..cd591c17198be 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_gpu.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_gpu.c
> @@ -329,35 +329,34 @@ int panthor_gpu_flush_caches(struct panthor_device *ptdev,
[ ... ]
> - if (!wait_event_timeout(ptdev->gpu->reqs_acked,
> + if (!wait_event_lock_timeout(ptdev->gpu->reqs_acked,
> !(ptdev->gpu->pending_reqs & GPU_IRQ_CLEAN_CACHES_COMPLETED),
> - msecs_to_jiffies(100))) {
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&ptdev->gpu->reqs_lock, flags);
> + ptdev->gpu->reqs_lock, msecs_to_jiffies(100))) {
> if ((ptdev->gpu->pending_reqs & GPU_IRQ_CLEAN_CACHES_COMPLETED) != 0 &&
> !(gpu_read(gpu->irq.iomem, INT_RAWSTAT) & GPU_IRQ_CLEAN_CACHES_COMPLETED))
> ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but is there a race condition here
with the threaded IRQ handler?
If panthor_gpu_irq_handler() clears the hardware interrupt status via
INT_CLEAR before acquiring reqs_lock, it can be preempted:
gpu_write(gpu->irq.iomem, INT_CLEAR, status);
// ... preemptible window ...
spin_lock(&ptdev->gpu->reqs_lock);
if (status & ptdev->gpu->pending_reqs) {
If the 100ms timeout expires during this precise window, the fallback condition
above evaluates under reqs_lock.
It finds that pending_reqs still indicates the request is pending, but
checking INT_RAWSTAT shows the interrupt is not pending (because it was just
cleared by the preempted thread).
Could this cause the wait logic to falsely conclude the hardware timed out,
return -ETIMEDOUT, and schedule a spurious full GPU reset?
[ ... ]
> @@ -377,27 +376,25 @@ int panthor_gpu_soft_reset(struct panthor_device *ptdev)
[ ... ]
> - if (!wait_event_timeout(ptdev->gpu->reqs_acked,
> + if (!wait_event_lock_timeout(ptdev->gpu->reqs_acked,
> !(ptdev->gpu->pending_reqs & GPU_IRQ_RESET_COMPLETED),
> + ptdev->gpu->reqs_lock,
> msecs_to_jiffies(100))) {
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&ptdev->gpu->reqs_lock, flags);
> if ((ptdev->gpu->pending_reqs & GPU_IRQ_RESET_COMPLETED) != 0 &&
> !(gpu_read(gpu->irq.iomem, INT_RAWSTAT) & GPU_IRQ_RESET_COMPLETED))
> timedout = true;
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this suffer from the same race condition
with the threaded IRQ handler as the flush caches timeout logic above?
> else
> ptdev->gpu->pending_reqs &= ~GPU_IRQ_RESET_COMPLETED;
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ptdev->gpu->reqs_lock, flags);
> }
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260730-panthor-cache-flush-fix-v2-0-28790478bfff@collabora.com?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-30 12:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-30 11:45 [PATCH v2 0/3] Rework panthor's cache flush and soft reset locking Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-07-30 11:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] wait: Introduce non-irq variants of wait_event_lock_timeout Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-07-30 11:53 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 15:08 ` Liviu Dudau
2026-07-31 8:00 ` Steven Price
2026-07-30 11:45 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] drm/panthor: Revisit reqs_lock handling in flush/reset paths Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-07-30 12:02 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-30 14:56 ` Liviu Dudau
2026-07-31 8:01 ` Steven Price
2026-08-03 8:53 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-08-03 13:13 ` Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-08-03 13:20 ` Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-08-03 15:59 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-07-30 11:45 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] drm/panthor: Add tracepoints for cache flushing Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-07-30 13:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-07-30 15:14 ` Liviu Dudau
2026-07-31 8:03 ` Steven Price
2026-08-03 9:03 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-08-04 14:44 ` Nicolas Frattaroli
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=20260730120229.9EC5F1F00A3E@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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