From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/7] Default request/fence expiry + watchdog
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:10:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YF2k9TivGrDdenoE@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210324121335.2307063-1-tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:13:28PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>
> "Watchdog" aka "restoring hangcheck" aka default request/fence expiry - second
> post of a somewhat controversial feature, now upgraded to patch status.
>
> I quote the "watchdog" becuase in classical sense watchdog would allow userspace
> to ping it and so remain alive.
>
> I quote "restoring hangcheck" because this series, contrary to the old
> hangcheck, is not looking at whether the workload is making any progress from
> the kernel side either. (Although disclaimer my memory may be leaky - Daniel
> suspects old hangcheck had some stricter, more indiscriminatory, angles to it.
> But apart from being prone to both false negatives and false positives I can't
> remember that myself.)
>
> Short version - ask is to fail any user submissions after a set time period. In
> this RFC that time is twelve seconds.
>
> Time counts from the moment user submission is "runnable" (implicit and explicit
> dependencies have been cleared) and keeps counting regardless of the GPU
> contetion caused by other users of the system.
>
> So semantics are really a bit weak, but again, I understand this is really
> really wanted by the DRM core even if I am not convinced it is a good idea.
>
> There are some dangers with doing this - text borrowed from a patch in the
> series:
>
> This can have an effect that workloads which used to work fine will
> suddenly start failing. Even workloads comprised of short batches but in
> long dependency chains can be terminated.
>
> And becuase of lack of agreement on usefulness and safety of fence error
> propagation this partial execution can be invisible to userspace even if
> it is "listening" to returned fence status.
>
> Another interaction is with hangcheck where care needs to be taken timeout
> is not set lower or close to three times the heartbeat interval. Otherwise
> a hang in any application can cause complete termination of all
> submissions from unrelated clients. Any users modifying the per engine
> heartbeat intervals therefore need to be aware of this potential denial of
> service to avoid inadvertently enabling it.
>
> Given all this I am personally not convinced the scheme is a good idea.
> Intuitively it feels object importers would be better positioned to
> enforce the time they are willing to wait for something to complete.
>
> v2:
> * Dropped context param.
> * Improved commit messages and Kconfig text.
>
> v3:
> * Log timeouts.
> * Bump timeout to 20s to see if it helps Tigerlake.
I think 20s is a bit much, and seems like problem is still there in igt. I
think we need look at that and figure out what to do with it. And then go
back down with the timeout somewhat again since 20s is quite a long time.
Irrespective of all the additional gaps/opens around watchdog timeout.
-Daniel
> * Fix sentinel assert.
>
> v4:
> * A round of review feedback applied.
>
> Chris Wilson (1):
> drm/i915: Individual request cancellation
>
> Tvrtko Ursulin (6):
> drm/i915: Extract active lookup engine to a helper
> drm/i915: Restrict sentinel requests further
> drm/i915: Handle async cancellation in sentinel assert
> drm/i915: Request watchdog infrastructure
> drm/i915: Fail too long user submissions by default
> drm/i915: Allow configuring default request expiry via modparam
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.profile | 14 ++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_context.c | 73 ++++---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_context_types.h | 4 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_param.h | 11 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h | 4 +
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_heartbeat.c | 1 +
> .../drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c | 23 +-
> .../drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.h | 2 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c | 3 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h | 2 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 28 +++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h | 7 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c | 5 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 129 ++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.h | 16 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_request.c | 201 ++++++++++++++++++
> 17 files changed, 479 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.27.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-26 9:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-24 12:13 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/7] Default request/fence expiry + watchdog Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/7] drm/i915: Extract active lookup engine to a helper Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 12:21 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/7] drm/i915: Individual request cancellation Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 15:24 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/7] drm/i915: Restrict sentinel requests further Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 15:25 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-26 0:01 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/7] drm/i915: Handle async cancellation in sentinel assert Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 17:22 ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/7] drm/i915: Request watchdog infrastructure Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-26 0:00 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-03-26 10:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/7] drm/i915: Fail too long user submissions by default Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-24 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: Allow configuring default request expiry via modparam Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-26 0:25 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-03-24 13:16 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Default request/fence expiry + watchdog (rev5) Patchwork
2021-03-24 13:21 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: " Patchwork
2021-03-24 13:48 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-03-24 23:29 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-03-26 9:10 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2021-03-26 10:31 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/7] Default request/fence expiry + watchdog Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-04-08 10:18 ` Daniel Vetter
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=YF2k9TivGrDdenoE@phenom.ffwll.local \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.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