From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: John.C.Harrison@Intel.com, Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
Cc: DRI-Devel@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Don't deadlock busyness stats vs reset
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 10:09:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56a6c98a-069c-77b0-d6c5-4575bc324075@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221028194649.1130223-3-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
On 28/10/2022 20:46, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>
> The engine busyness stats has a worker function to do things like
> 64bit extend the 32bit hardware counters. The GuC's reset prepare
> function flushes out this worker function to ensure no corruption
> happens during the reset. Unforunately, the worker function has an
> infinite wait for active resets to finish before doing its work. Thus
> a deadlock would occur if the worker function had actually started
> just as the reset starts.
>
> Update the worker to abort if a reset is in progress rather than
> waiting for it to complete. It will still acquire the reset lock in
> the case where a reset was not already in progress. So the processing
> is still safe from corruption, but the deadlock can no longer occur.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 6 ++++--
> 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c
> index 3159df6cdd492..2f48c6e4420ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.c
> @@ -1407,7 +1407,7 @@ void intel_gt_handle_error(struct intel_gt *gt,
> intel_runtime_pm_put(gt->uncore->rpm, wakeref);
> }
>
> -int intel_gt_reset_trylock(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu)
> +static int _intel_gt_reset_trylock(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu, bool retry)
> {
> might_lock(>->reset.backoff_srcu);
> might_sleep();
> @@ -1416,6 +1416,9 @@ int intel_gt_reset_trylock(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu)
> while (test_bit(I915_RESET_BACKOFF, >->reset.flags)) {
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> + if (!retry)
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> if (wait_event_interruptible(gt->reset.queue,
> !test_bit(I915_RESET_BACKOFF,
> >->reset.flags)))
Would it be more obvious to rename the existing semantics to
intel_gt_reset_interruptible(), while the flavour you add in this patch
truly is trylock? I am not sure, since it's all a bit special, but
trylock sure feels confusing if it can sleep forever...
Regards,
Tvrtko
> @@ -1429,6 +1432,16 @@ int intel_gt_reset_trylock(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +int intel_gt_reset_trylock_noretry(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu)
> +{
> + return _intel_gt_reset_trylock(gt, srcu, false);
> +}
> +
> +int intel_gt_reset_trylock(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu)
> +{
> + return _intel_gt_reset_trylock(gt, srcu, true);
> +}
> +
> void intel_gt_reset_unlock(struct intel_gt *gt, int tag)
> __releases(>->reset.backoff_srcu)
> {
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.h
> index adc734e673870..7f863726eb6a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_reset.h
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ int __intel_engine_reset_bh(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
>
> void __i915_request_reset(struct i915_request *rq, bool guilty);
>
> +int __must_check intel_gt_reset_trylock_noretry(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu);
> int __must_check intel_gt_reset_trylock(struct intel_gt *gt, int *srcu);
> void intel_gt_reset_unlock(struct intel_gt *gt, int tag);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> index 941613be3b9dd..1fa1bc7dde3df 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> @@ -1401,9 +1401,11 @@ static void guc_timestamp_ping(struct work_struct *wrk)
>
> /*
> * Synchronize with gt reset to make sure the worker does not
> - * corrupt the engine/guc stats.
> + * corrupt the engine/guc stats. NB: can't actually block waiting
> + * for a reset to complete as the reset requires flushing out
> + * any running worker thread. So waiting would deadlock.
> */
> - ret = intel_gt_reset_trylock(gt, &srcu);
> + ret = intel_gt_reset_trylock_noretry(gt, &srcu);
> if (ret)
> return;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-31 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-28 19:46 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/2] Fix for two GuC issues John.C.Harrison
2022-10-28 19:46 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/guc: Properly initialise kernel contexts John.C.Harrison
2022-10-28 19:46 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/guc: Don't deadlock busyness stats vs reset John.C.Harrison
2022-10-31 10:09 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2022-10-31 12:51 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-10-31 18:30 ` John Harrison
2022-11-01 9:58 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-11-01 16:56 ` John Harrison
2022-11-02 8:17 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-10-28 20:58 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for Fix for two GuC issues Patchwork
2022-10-29 0:07 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " 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=56a6c98a-069c-77b0-d6c5-4575bc324075@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.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