From: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Make sure engines are idle during GPU idling in LR mode
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 22:57:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1478206643.30482.28.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161103185927.GC5674@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
On Thu, 2016-11-03 at 18:59 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 06:19:37PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote:
> > We assume that the GPU is idle once receiving the seqno via the last
> > request's user interrupt. In execlist mode the corresponding context
> > completed interrupt can be delayed though and until this latter
> > interrupt arrives we consider the request to be pending on the ELSP
> > submit port. This can cause a problem during system suspend where this
> > last request will be seen by the resume code as still pending. Such
> > pending requests are normally replayed after a GPU reset, but during
> > resume we reset both SW and HW tracking of the ring head/tail pointers,
> > so replaying the pending request with its stale tale pointer will leave
> > the ring in an inconsistent state. A subsequent request submission can
> > lead then to the GPU executing from uninitialized area in the ring
> > behind the above stale tail pointer.
> >
> > Fix this by making sure any pending request on the ELSP port is
> > completed before suspending. I used a polling wait since the completion
> > time I measured was <1ms and since normally we only need to wait during
> > system suspend. GPU idling during runtime suspend is scheduled with a
> > delay (currently 50-100ms) after the retirement of the last request at
> > which point the context completed interrupt must have arrived already.
> >
> > The chance of this bug was increased by
> >
> > commit 1c777c5d1dcdf8fa0223fcff35fb387b5bb9517a
> > Author: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > Date: Wed Oct 12 17:46:37 2016 +0300
> >
> > drm/i915/hsw: Fix GPU hang during resume from S3-devices state
> >
> > but it could happen even without the explicit GPU reset, since we
> > disable interrupts afterwards during the suspend sequence.
> >
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
> > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98470
> > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 3 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > index 1f995ce..5ff02b5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > @@ -2766,6 +2766,9 @@ i915_gem_idle_work_handler(struct work_struct *work)
> > if (dev_priv->gt.active_requests)
> > goto out_unlock;
> >
> > + if (i915.enable_execlists)
> > + intel_lr_wait_engines_idle(dev_priv);
>
> Idle work handler... So runtime suspend.
> Anyway this is not an ideal place for a stall under struct_mutex (even if
> 16x10us, it's the principle!).
During runtime suspend this won't add any overhead since the context
done interrupt happened already (unless there is a bug somewhere else).
> Move this to before the first READ_ONCE(dev_priv->gt.active_requests);
> so we stall before taking the lock, and skip if any new requests arrive
> whilst waiting.
>
> (Also i915.enable_execlists is forbidden. But meh)
>
> static struct drm_i915_gem_request *
> execlists_active_port(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> {
> struct drm_i915_gem_request *request;
>
> request = READ_ONCE(engine->execlist_port[1]);
> if (request)
> return request;
>
> return READ_ONCE(engine->execlist_port[0]);
> }
>
> /* Wait for execlists to settle, but bail if any new requests come in */
> for_each_engine(engine, dev_priv, id) {
> struct drm_i915_gem_request *request;
>
> request = execlists_active_port(engine);
> if (!request)
> continue;
>
> if (wait_for(execlists_active_port(engine) != request, 10))
> DRM_ERROR("Timeout waiting for %s to idle\n", engine->name);
> }
Hm, but we still need to re-check and bail out if not idle with
struct_mutex held, since gt.active_requests could go 0->1->0 before
taking struct_mutex? I can rewrite things with that check added, using
the above.
--Imre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-03 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-03 16:19 [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Make sure engines are idle during GPU idling in LR mode Imre Deak
2016-11-03 16:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Add assert for no pending GPU requests during resume " Imre Deak
2016-11-03 19:08 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-03 16:45 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: Make sure engines are idle during GPU idling " Patchwork
2016-11-03 16:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-11-03 18:59 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-03 20:57 ` Imre Deak [this message]
2016-11-03 21:14 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-04 20:33 ` Imre Deak
2016-11-04 21:01 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-04 22:32 ` Imre Deak
2016-11-05 0:11 ` 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=1478206643.30482.28.camel@intel.com \
--to=imre.deak@intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=mika.kuoppala@intel.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