Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: John.C.Harrison@Intel.com
Cc: Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org, DRI-Devel@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915/guc: Temporarily bump the GuC load timeout
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 17:13:04 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211221011303.GA27635@jons-linux-dev-box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211221005221.1090824-2-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:52:19PM -0800, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> 
> There is a known (but exceedingly unlikely) race condition where the
> asynchronous frequency management code could reduce the GT clock while
> a GuC reload is in progress (during a full GT reset). A fix is in
> progress but there are complex locking issues to be resolved. In the
> meantime bump the timeout to 500ms. Even at slowest clock, this
> should be sufficient. And in the working case, a larger timeout makes
> no difference.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>

Any idea of the ETA for the proper fix? Also if the proper fix makes the
locking more complicated I'm probably of the opinion we just live with a
longer timer as full GTs shouldn't really ever happen in practice and if
they take a longer time, so be it.

Anyways for this patch:
Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_fw.c | 13 +++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_fw.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_fw.c
> index 31420ce1ce6b..c03bde5ec61f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_fw.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_fw.c
> @@ -105,12 +105,21 @@ static int guc_wait_ucode(struct intel_uncore *uncore)
>  	/*
>  	 * Wait for the GuC to start up.
>  	 * NB: Docs recommend not using the interrupt for completion.
> -	 * Measurements indicate this should take no more than 20ms, so a
> +	 * Measurements indicate this should take no more than 20ms
> +	 * (assuming the GT clock is at maximum frequency). So, a
>  	 * timeout here indicates that the GuC has failed and is unusable.
>  	 * (Higher levels of the driver may decide to reset the GuC and
>  	 * attempt the ucode load again if this happens.)
> +	 *
> +	 * FIXME: There is a known (but exceedingly unlikely) race condition
> +	 * where the asynchronous frequency management code could reduce
> +	 * the GT clock while a GuC reload is in progress (during a full
> +	 * GT reset). A fix is in progress but there are complex locking
> +	 * issues to be resolved. In the meantime bump the timeout to
> +	 * 500ms. Even at slowest clock, this should be sufficient. And
> +	 * in the working case, a larger timeout makes no difference.
>  	 */
> -	ret = wait_for(guc_ready(uncore, &status), 100);
> +	ret = wait_for(guc_ready(uncore, &status), 500);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		struct drm_device *drm = &uncore->i915->drm;
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-21  1:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-21  0:52 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/3] Update to GuC version 69.0.3 John.C.Harrison
2021-12-21  0:52 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915/guc: Temporarily bump the GuC load timeout John.C.Harrison
2021-12-21  1:13   ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2021-12-21  0:52 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/guc: Update to GuC version 69.0.3 John.C.Harrison
2021-12-21  0:52 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915/guc: Improve GuC loading status check/error reports John.C.Harrison
2021-12-21  0:56 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for Update to GuC version 69.0.3 Patchwork
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-12-21 20:28 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/3] " John.C.Harrison
2021-12-21 20:29 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915/guc: Temporarily bump the GuC load timeout John.C.Harrison

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=20211221011303.GA27635@jons-linux-dev-box \
    --to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=DRI-Devel@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org \
    --cc=Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org \
    --cc=John.C.Harrison@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