From: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
To: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>,
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: <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>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@ursulin.net>,
Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/huc: Fix fence not released on early probe errors
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 02:12:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c1b77ca1-1851-4e3b-be37-267388a7501c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250402172057.209924-2-janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
On 4/2/2025 10:20 AM, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> HuC delayed loading fence, introduced with commit 27536e03271da
> ("drm/i915/huc: track delayed HuC load with a fence"), is registered with
> object tracker early on driver probe but unregistered only from driver
> remove, which is not called on early probe errors. Since its memory is
> allocated under devres, then released anyway, it may happen to be
> allocated again to the fence and reused on future driver probes, resulting
> in kernel warnings that taint the kernel:
>
> <4> [309.731371] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> <3> [309.731373] ODEBUG: init destroyed (active state 0) object: ffff88813d7dd2e0 object type: i915_sw_fence hint: sw_fence_dummy_notify+0x0/0x20 [i915]
> <4> [309.731575] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 3161 at lib/debugobjects.c:612 debug_print_object+0x93/0xf0
> ...
> <4> [309.731693] CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 3161 Comm: i915_module_loa Tainted: G U 6.14.0-CI_DRM_16362-gf0fd77956987+ #1
> ...
> <4> [309.731700] RIP: 0010:debug_print_object+0x93/0xf0
> ...
> <4> [309.731728] Call Trace:
> <4> [309.731730] <TASK>
> ...
> <4> [309.731949] __debug_object_init+0x17b/0x1c0
> <4> [309.731957] debug_object_init+0x34/0x50
> <4> [309.732126] __i915_sw_fence_init+0x34/0x60 [i915]
> <4> [309.732256] intel_huc_init_early+0x4b/0x1d0 [i915]
> <4> [309.732468] intel_uc_init_early+0x61/0x680 [i915]
> <4> [309.732667] intel_gt_common_init_early+0x105/0x130 [i915]
> <4> [309.732804] intel_root_gt_init_early+0x63/0x80 [i915]
> <4> [309.732938] i915_driver_probe+0x1fa/0xeb0 [i915]
> <4> [309.733075] i915_pci_probe+0xe6/0x220 [i915]
> <4> [309.733198] local_pci_probe+0x44/0xb0
> <4> [309.733203] pci_device_probe+0xf4/0x270
> <4> [309.733209] really_probe+0xee/0x3c0
> <4> [309.733215] __driver_probe_device+0x8c/0x180
> <4> [309.733219] driver_probe_device+0x24/0xd0
> <4> [309.733223] __driver_attach+0x10f/0x220
> <4> [309.733230] bus_for_each_dev+0x7d/0xe0
> <4> [309.733236] driver_attach+0x1e/0x30
> <4> [309.733239] bus_add_driver+0x151/0x290
> <4> [309.733244] driver_register+0x5e/0x130
> <4> [309.733247] __pci_register_driver+0x7d/0x90
> <4> [309.733251] i915_pci_register_driver+0x23/0x30 [i915]
> <4> [309.733413] i915_init+0x34/0x120 [i915]
> <4> [309.733655] do_one_initcall+0x62/0x3f0
> <4> [309.733667] do_init_module+0x97/0x2a0
> <4> [309.733671] load_module+0x25ff/0x2890
> <4> [309.733688] init_module_from_file+0x97/0xe0
> <4> [309.733701] idempotent_init_module+0x118/0x330
> <4> [309.733711] __x64_sys_finit_module+0x77/0x100
> <4> [309.733715] x64_sys_call+0x1f37/0x2650
> <4> [309.733719] do_syscall_64+0x91/0x180
> <4> [309.733763] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> <4> [309.733792] </TASK>
> ...
> <4> [309.733806] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
>
> That scenario is most easily reproducible with
> igt@i915_module_load@reload-with-fault-injection.
>
> Fix the issue by moving the cleanup step to driver release path.
>
> Fixes: 27536e03271da ("drm/i915/huc: track delayed HuC load with a fence")
> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/13592
> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
> Cc: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
I'm kind of surprised that this issue only showed up in the last few
months, given that the code has been there for 2+ years. Did we change
something that caused this to show up? I had a quick look at the patches
merged around the time this issue was first reported but I didn't spot
anything that could impact this.
Daniele
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c | 11 +++++------
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
> index f30c90650b7ec..9659e6a301e19 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.c
> @@ -317,6 +317,11 @@ void intel_huc_init_early(struct intel_huc *huc)
> }
> }
>
> +void intel_huc_fini_late(struct intel_huc *huc)
> +{
> + delayed_huc_load_fini(huc);
> +}
> +
> #define HUC_LOAD_MODE_STRING(x) (x ? "GSC" : "legacy")
> static int check_huc_loading_mode(struct intel_huc *huc)
> {
> @@ -414,12 +419,6 @@ int intel_huc_init(struct intel_huc *huc)
>
> void intel_huc_fini(struct intel_huc *huc)
> {
> - /*
> - * the fence is initialized in init_early, so we need to clean it up
> - * even if HuC loading is off.
> - */
> - delayed_huc_load_fini(huc);
> -
> if (huc->heci_pkt)
> i915_vma_unpin_and_release(&huc->heci_pkt, 0);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.h
> index d5e441b9e08d6..921ad4b1687f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_huc.h
> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ struct intel_huc {
>
> int intel_huc_sanitize(struct intel_huc *huc);
> void intel_huc_init_early(struct intel_huc *huc);
> +void intel_huc_fini_late(struct intel_huc *huc);
> int intel_huc_init(struct intel_huc *huc);
> void intel_huc_fini(struct intel_huc *huc);
> int intel_huc_auth(struct intel_huc *huc, enum intel_huc_authentication_type type);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> index 90ba1b0b4c9d2..4a3493e8d4333 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c
> @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ void intel_uc_init_late(struct intel_uc *uc)
>
> void intel_uc_driver_late_release(struct intel_uc *uc)
> {
> + intel_huc_fini_late(&uc->huc);
> }
>
> /**
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-03 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-02 17:20 [PATCH] drm/i915/huc: Fix fence not released on early probe errors Janusz Krzysztofik
2025-04-02 18:28 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2025-04-02 18:29 ` ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2025-04-02 18:51 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2025-04-02 20:24 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-04-03 9:17 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2025-04-04 3:33 ` Ravali, JupallyX
2025-04-03 9:12 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio [this message]
2025-04-03 9:35 ` [PATCH] " Janusz Krzysztofik
2025-04-08 14:07 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2025-04-08 20:23 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2025-04-03 13:07 ` ✓ i915.CI.Full: success for " Patchwork
2025-04-03 13:16 ` [PATCH] " Krzysztof Karas
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=c1b77ca1-1851-4e3b-be37-267388a7501c@intel.com \
--to=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
--cc=alan.previn.teres.alexis@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=tursulin@ursulin.net \
/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