From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bugzilla-daemon@freedesktop.org Subject: [Bug 110674] Crashes / Resets From AMDGPU / Radeon VII Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 16:47:31 +0000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2118292844==" Return-path: Received: from culpepper.freedesktop.org (culpepper.freedesktop.org [IPv6:2610:10:20:722:a800:ff:fe98:4b55]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1EF6E58B for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 16:47:31 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org --===============2118292844== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="15656284516.FcC7.23923" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --15656284516.FcC7.23923 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 16:47:31 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D110674 --- Comment #88 from ReddestDream --- >The question then becomes: Why doesn't the race condition happen with only= one screen? Perhaps it's a matter of speed. With a single display, the dri= ver detect the displays, read/parse the EDID data, initialize in time. But = then that doesn't explain why the crash still occurs if you boot with one D= isplayPort monitor and attach another after X is running. I do suspect it's a matter of speed and complexity when you have more monit= ors. Also maybe the clock it tries to set (the value of hard_min_level) is diffe= rent if you only have one monitor and somehow that takes more time (resetting it away from some default). I do wonder if maybe in: "[SetUclkToHightestDpmLevel] Set hard min uclk failed!", return ret); It should return -EINVAL instead. Maybe then it would reset and try again instead of just ignoring it and continuing with initialization anyway, lead= ing to instability. >One thing I've been trying to work out is the difference between vega21_pp= t.c and vega20_hwmgr.c is, as they both contain slightly different or ide= ntical versions of the same functions. It looks like the functions in vega2= 0_hwmgr.c take precedence but it's strange to see this duplication and bot= h files are worked on in the commit history. Hmm. That is interesting. I'll take a look. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= --15656284516.FcC7.23923 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 16:47:31 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated

Comme= nt # 88 on bug 11067= 4 from ReddestDream 
>The question then becomes: Why doesn=
't the race condition happen with only one screen? Perhaps it's a matter of=
 speed. With a single display, the driver detect the displays, read/parse t=
he EDID data, initialize in time. But then that doesn't explain why the cra=
sh still occurs if you boot with one DisplayPort monitor and attach another=
 after X is running.

I do suspect it's a matter of speed and complexity when you have more monit=
ors.
Also maybe the clock it tries to set (the value of hard_min_level) is diffe=
rent
if you only have one monitor and somehow that takes more time (resetting it
away from some default).

I do wonder if maybe in:

"[SetUclkToHightestDpmLevel] Set hard min uclk failed!",
                                return ret);

It should return -EINVAL instead. Maybe then it would reset and try again
instead of just ignoring it and continuing with initialization anyway, lead=
ing
to instability.

>One thing I've been trying to work out is the dif=
ference between vega21_ppt.c and   vega20_hwmgr.c is, as they both contain =
slightly different or identical versions of the same functions. It looks li=
ke the functions in vega20_hwmgr.c  take precedence but it's strange to see=
 this duplication and both files are worked on in the commit history.

Hmm. That is interesting. I'll take a look.

You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are the assignee for the bug.
= --15656284516.FcC7.23923-- --===============2118292844== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZHJpLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApkcmktZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vbGlz dHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vZHJpLWRldmVs --===============2118292844==--