From: Arunpravin Paneer Selvam <arunpravin.paneerselvam@amd.com>
To: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: christian.koenig@amd.com, alexander.deucher@amd.com,
Anand.Raghavendra@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpu/buddy: fix missing split-undo on allocation-search exhaustion
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 15:56:57 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <81ef54c5-1cb7-4608-a779-90a2d9bd6d12@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <74e8255e-acde-4270-a0c4-10e14e3d7ba4@intel.com>
Hi Matthew,
On 9/29/2026 3:20 PM, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 28/09/2026 18:51, Arunpravin Paneer Selvam wrote:
>> From: Arunpravin Paneer Selvam <Arunpravin.PaneerSelvam@amd.com>
>>
>> __alloc_range_bias() and __alloc_range() only undid splits made during
>> their search when split_block() itself failed. Their DFS-exhaustion
>> failure paths (-ENOSPC, when no suitable block is found) skipped the
>> undo, leaving the buddy tree needlessly fragmented over repeated
>> failed allocation attempts.
>>
>> Fix by recording every successful split_block() call in a list and
>> unconditionally undoing those splits on every failure exit, via a
>> new single-level gpu_buddy_merge_one_level() helper (the original
>> __gpu_buddy_undo_splits() cascaded merges upward, which is unsafe
>> when called per split-list entry).
>
> At least for __alloc_range(), I thought if we do a split it should be
> always guaranteed that some eventual side (left or right at some
> depth) will be marked as allocated, unless the split itself fails, in
> which case you might need the special undo path. So I don't think you
> can ever have two free buddies on the -ENOSPC path, in which case you
> don't need any "undo splits", you can just trigger the normal
> gpu_buddy_free_list_internal() path, which is what the code currently
> does? What am I missing?
You are right. Whenever __alloc_range() splits a block, some side
always ends up marked allocated, so on the -ENOSPC path there are never
two free buddies left behind - freeing the allocated list via
gpu_buddy_free_list_internal() already merges every split back.
So I will drop the undo from __alloc_range() and keep it only in
__alloc_range_bias() , which allocates nothing on failure and so has no
list to trigger that cleanup.
Thanks,
Arun.
>
>>
>> Resolves the igt@kms_plane@plane-panning-bottom-right@pipe-a/pipe-b
>> regression.
>>
>> Fixes: 1ad5e807f716 ("gpu/buddy: replace dual-tree/force_merge with
>> decoupled dirty tracker")
>> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
>> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
>> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Arunpravin Paneer Selvam
>> <Arunpravin.PaneerSelvam@amd.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/buddy.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/buddy.c b/drivers/gpu/buddy.c
>> index 2f2aaadafe35..b741160d3d16 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/buddy.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/buddy.c
>> @@ -1240,6 +1240,52 @@ static void __gpu_buddy_undo_splits(struct
>> gpu_buddy *mm,
>> }
>> }
>> +static void gpu_buddy_merge_one_level(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> + struct gpu_buddy_block *block)
>> +{
>> + struct gpu_buddy_block *buddy = __get_buddy(block);
>> + struct gpu_buddy_block *parent = block->parent;
>> + enum gpu_block_state block_state;
>> +
>> + if (!buddy || !gpu_buddy_block_is_free(block) ||
>> + !gpu_buddy_block_is_free(buddy))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + block_state = gpu_block_cached_state(block);
>> + if (gpu_block_cached_state(buddy) != block_state)
>> + block_state = GPU_BLOCK_MIXED;
>> +
>> + rbtree_remove(mm, block);
>> + rbtree_remove(mm, buddy);
>> + mm->free_scoreboard[gpu_buddy_block_order(block)] -= 2;
>> +
>> + gpu_block_free(mm, block);
>> + gpu_block_free(mm, buddy);
>> +
>> + __mark_free(mm, parent, block_state);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void gpu_buddy_undo_splits(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> + struct gpu_buddy_block *block,
>> + struct list_head *splits)
>> +{
>> + if (block)
>> + gpu_buddy_merge_one_level(mm, block);
>> +
>> + while (!list_empty(splits)) {
>> + struct gpu_buddy_block *parent =
>> + list_first_entry(splits, struct gpu_buddy_block,
>> + tmp_link);
>> +
>> + list_del(&parent->tmp_link);
>> +
>> + if (!gpu_buddy_block_is_split(parent))
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + gpu_buddy_merge_one_level(mm, parent->left);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> static struct gpu_buddy_block *
>> __alloc_range_bias(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> u64 start, u64 end,
>> @@ -1249,6 +1295,7 @@ __alloc_range_bias(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> u64 req_size = mm->chunk_size << order;
>> struct gpu_buddy_block *block;
>> LIST_HEAD(dfs);
>> + LIST_HEAD(splits);
>> int err;
>> int i;
>> @@ -1313,6 +1360,8 @@ __alloc_range_bias(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> err = split_block(mm, block);
>> if (unlikely(err))
>> goto err_undo;
>> +
>> + list_add(&block->tmp_link, &splits);
>> }
>> /*
>> @@ -1349,7 +1398,7 @@ __alloc_range_bias(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> }
>> } while (1);
>> - return ERR_PTR(-ENOSPC);
>> + err = -ENOSPC;
>> err_undo:
>> /*
>> @@ -1357,7 +1406,8 @@ __alloc_range_bias(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> * bigger is better, so make sure we merge everything back
>> before we
>> * free the allocated blocks.
>> */
>> - __gpu_buddy_undo_splits(mm, block);
>> + gpu_buddy_undo_splits(mm, block, &splits);
>> +
>> return ERR_PTR(err);
>> }
>> @@ -1580,6 +1630,7 @@ static int __alloc_range(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> struct gpu_buddy_block *block;
>> u64 total_allocated = 0;
>> LIST_HEAD(allocated);
>> + LIST_HEAD(splits);
>> u64 end;
>> int err;
>> @@ -1605,7 +1656,7 @@ static int __alloc_range(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> if (gpu_buddy_block_is_allocated(block)) {
>> err = -ENOSPC;
>> - goto err_free;
>> + goto err_undo;
>> }
>> if (contains(start, end, block_start, block_end)) {
>> @@ -1634,6 +1685,8 @@ static int __alloc_range(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> err = split_block(mm, block);
>> if (unlikely(err))
>> goto err_undo;
>> +
>> + list_add(&block->tmp_link, &splits);
>> }
>> list_add(&block->right->tmp_link, dfs);
>> @@ -1642,7 +1695,7 @@ static int __alloc_range(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> if (total_allocated < size) {
>> err = -ENOSPC;
>> - goto err_free;
>> + goto err_undo;
>> }
>> list_splice_tail(&allocated, blocks);
>> @@ -1655,9 +1708,8 @@ static int __alloc_range(struct gpu_buddy *mm,
>> * bigger is better, so make sure we merge everything back
>> before we
>> * free the allocated blocks.
>> */
>> - __gpu_buddy_undo_splits(mm, block);
>> + gpu_buddy_undo_splits(mm, block, &splits);
>> -err_free:
>> if (err == -ENOSPC && total_allocated_on_err) {
>> list_splice_tail(&allocated, blocks);
>> *total_allocated_on_err = total_allocated;
>>
>> base-commit: 90780f2c3d30187116128f71bcf92c8ab63400e7
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 10:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-28 17:51 [PATCH 1/2] gpu/buddy: fix missing split-undo on allocation-search exhaustion Arunpravin Paneer Selvam
2026-09-28 17:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] gpu/buddy: add range-restricted contiguous allocation fallback Arunpravin Paneer Selvam
2026-09-28 19:02 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [1/2] gpu/buddy: fix missing split-undo on allocation-search exhaustion Patchwork
2026-09-29 0:59 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2026-09-29 9:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Matthew Auld
2026-09-29 10:26 ` Arunpravin Paneer Selvam [this message]
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=81ef54c5-1cb7-4608-a779-90a2d9bd6d12@amd.com \
--to=arunpravin.paneerselvam@amd.com \
--cc=Anand.Raghavendra@amd.com \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.auld@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