From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 8/8] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock().
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 21:16:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211005191617.GA174703@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211005150046.1000285-9-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 05:00:46PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> This is a revert of commits
> d67739268cf0e ("drm/i915/gt: Mark up the nested engine-pm timeline lock as irqsafe")
> 6c69a45445af9 ("drm/i915/gt: Mark context->active_count as protected by timeline->mutex")
>
> The existing code leads to a different behaviour depending on wheather
> lockdep is enabled or not. Any following lock that is acquired without
> disabling interrupts (but needs to) will not be noticed by lockdep.
>
> This it not just a lockdep annotation but is used but an actual mutex_t
> that is properly used as a lock but in case of __timeline_mark_lock()
> lockdep is only told that it is acquired but no lock has been acquired.
>
> It appears that its purporse is just satisfy the lockdep_assert_held()
> check in intel_context_mark_active(). The other problem with disabling
> interrupts is that on PREEMPT_RT interrupts are also disabled which
> leads to problems for instance later during memory allocation.
>
> Add an argument to intel_context_mark_active() which is true if the lock
> must have been acquired, false if other magic is involved and the lock
> is not needed. Use the `false' argument only from within
> switch_to_kernel_context() and remove __timeline_mark_lock().
>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Eeew, nice find.
> -static inline void intel_context_mark_active(struct intel_context *ce)
> +static inline void intel_context_mark_active(struct intel_context *ce,
> + bool timeline_mutex_needed)
> {
> - lockdep_assert_held(&ce->timeline->mutex);
> + if (timeline_mutex_needed)
> + lockdep_assert_held(&ce->timeline->mutex);
> ++ce->active_count;
> }
Chris, might it be possible to write that something like:
lockdep_assert(lockdep_is_held(&ce->timeline->mutex) ||
engine_is_parked(ce));
instead?
Otherwise,
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-05 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-05 15:00 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/8] drm/i915: PREEMPT_RT related fixups Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/8] drm/i915: Use preempt_disable/enable_rt() where recommended Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/8] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts on PREEMPT_RT during atomic updates Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-06 9:16 ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/8] drm/i915: Disable tracing points on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-06 9:34 ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-10-06 10:15 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-06 16:46 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/8] drm/i915: skip DRM_I915_LOW_LEVEL_TRACEPOINTS with NOTRACE Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/8] drm/i915/gt: Queue and wait for the irq_work item Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/8] drm/i915/gt: Use spin_lock_irq() instead of local_irq_disable() + spin_lock() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/8] drm/i915: Drop the irqs_disabled() check Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 8/8] drm/i915: Don't disable interrupts and pretend a lock as been acquired in __timeline_mark_lock() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-05 19:16 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-10-06 6:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-10-08 6:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [drm/i915] 511e5fb0c3: WARNING:suspicious_RCU_usage kernel test robot
2021-10-05 16:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: PREEMPT_RT related fixups Patchwork
2021-10-05 16:48 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2021-10-06 17:41 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for drm/i915: PREEMPT_RT related fixups. (rev2) Patchwork
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=20211005191617.GA174703@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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