From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/26] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Split eb_vma into its own allocation"
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:52:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c9123589-f0ce-0925-5ce0-d5e2277f1ca5@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dacbaf04-a149-38e2-5c07-3d3e10589bd3@linux.intel.com>
Op 29-06-2020 om 17:08 schreef Tvrtko Ursulin:
>
> On 23/06/2020 15:28, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> This reverts commit 0f1dd02295f35dcdcbaafcbcbbec0753884ab974.
>> This conflicts with the ww mutex handling, which needs to drop
>> the references after gpu submission anyway, because otherwise we
>> may risk unlocking a BO after first freeing it.
>
> What is the problem here? eb_vma_array_put in eb_move_to_gpu? If so, could you just move this put to later in the sequence? I am simply thinking how to avoid controversial reverts. Because on the other hand I did not figure out what 0f1dd02295f35dcdcbaafcbcbbec0753884ab974 fixed in a few minutes I spent staring at the patch.
We need to unlock before we unref to prevent a use-after-free in unlock, so freeing and releasing in eb_move_to_gpu() is too early. This means we only end up with 1 path for unlock, so it's fine to revert.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-30 11:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-23 14:28 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/26] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Async GPU relocations only" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 02/26] drm/i915: Revert relocation chaining commits Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 03/26] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Drop relocation slowpath" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 04/26] drm/i915: Add an implementation for i915_gem_ww_ctx locking, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-24 7:10 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-24 7:43 ` Chris Wilson
2020-06-24 7:49 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-24 8:27 ` Chris Wilson
2020-06-29 12:07 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-29 12:32 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-29 13:44 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/26] drm/i915: Remove locking from i915_gem_object_prepare_read/write Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-26 13:32 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-29 12:56 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/26] drm/i915: Parse command buffer earlier in eb_relocate(slow) Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-26 14:41 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-29 10:40 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-29 11:15 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-29 11:18 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-29 14:42 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/26] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Split eb_vma into its own allocation" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-29 15:08 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-30 11:52 ` Maarten Lankhorst [this message]
2020-06-30 12:31 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-30 14:07 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/26] drm/i915/gem: Make eb_add_lut interruptible wait on object lock Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-26 13:52 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-29 15:14 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-06-30 11:56 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/26] drm/i915: Use per object locking in execbuf, v12 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 10/26] drm/i915: Use ww locking in intel_renderstate Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 11/26] drm/i915: Add ww context handling to context_barrier_task Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 12/26] drm/i915: Nuke arguments to eb_pin_engine Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 13/26] drm/i915: Pin engine before pinning all objects, v4 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 14/26] drm/i915: Rework intel_context pinning to do everything outside of pin_mutex Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 15/26] drm/i915: Make sure execbuffer always passes ww state to i915_vma_pin Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-25 14:32 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 16/26] drm/i915: Convert i915_gem_object/client_blt.c to use ww locking as well, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 17/26] drm/i915: Kill last user of intel_context_create_request outside of selftests Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 18/26] drm/i915: Convert i915_perf to ww locking as well Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 19/26] drm/i915: Dirty hack to fix selftests locking inversion Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 20/26] drm/i915/selftests: Fix locking inversion in lrc selftest Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 21/26] drm/i915: Use ww pinning for intel_context_create_request() Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 22/26] drm/i915: Move i915_vma_lock in the selftests to avoid lock inversion, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 23/26] drm/i915: Add ww locking to vm_fault_gtt Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 24/26] drm/i915: Add ww locking to pin_to_display_plane Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 25/26] drm/i915: Ensure we hold the pin mutex Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 14:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 26/26] drm/i915: Kill context before taking ctx->mutex Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-24 11:05 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-30 14:16 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-02 13:26 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-02 14:51 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-03 10:35 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-06-23 15:23 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/26] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Async GPU relocations only" Chris Wilson
2020-06-24 11:19 ` Chris Wilson
2020-06-23 15:39 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for series starting with [01/26] " Patchwork
2020-06-24 11:58 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for series starting with [01/26] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Async GPU relocations only" (rev2) Patchwork
2020-06-24 11:59 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2020-06-24 12:48 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2020-07-01 13:10 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: " 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=c9123589-f0ce-0925-5ce0-d5e2277f1ca5@linux.intel.com \
--to=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@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