Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 11/13] drm/xe/ggtt: prime ggtt->lock against FS_RECLAIM
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 11:50:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230626105037.43780-26-matthew.auld@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230626105037.43780-15-matthew.auld@intel.com>

Increase the sensitivity of the ggtt->lock by priming it against
FS_RECLAIM, such that allocating memory while holding will result in
lockdep splats.

Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt.c | 11 +++++++++++
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt.c
index 7588fbc2f278..e1b84bc25375 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt.c
@@ -93,6 +93,16 @@ static void ggtt_fini_noalloc(struct drm_device *drm, void *arg)
 	xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm(ggtt->scratch);
 }
 
+static void primelockdep(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt)
+{
+	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP))
+		return;
+
+	fs_reclaim_acquire(GFP_KERNEL);
+	might_lock(&ggtt->lock);
+	fs_reclaim_release(GFP_KERNEL);
+}
+
 int xe_ggtt_init_noalloc(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt)
 {
 	struct xe_device *xe = tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile);
@@ -140,6 +150,7 @@ int xe_ggtt_init_noalloc(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt)
 	drm_mm_init(&ggtt->mm, xe_wopcm_size(xe),
 		    ggtt->size - xe_wopcm_size(xe));
 	mutex_init(&ggtt->lock);
+	primelockdep(ggtt);
 
 	return drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, ggtt_fini_noalloc, ggtt);
 }
-- 
2.41.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-06-26 10:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-26 10:50 [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 00/13] xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 01/13] drm/xe: fix xe_device_mem_access_get() races Matthew Auld
2023-06-30 15:22   ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-07-04 11:25     ` Matthew Auld
2023-07-04 15:29       ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-07-04 16:00         ` Matthew Auld
2023-07-11  9:00           ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-07-11 11:06             ` Matthew Auld
2023-07-11 17:56               ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 02/13] drm/xe/vm: tidy up xe_runtime_pm usage Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 03/13] drm/xe/debugfs: grab mem_access around forcewake Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 04/13] drm/xe/guc_pc: add missing mem_access for freq_rpe_show Matthew Auld
2023-06-27  6:53   ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-27  8:20     ` Matthew Auld
2023-06-27 10:14       ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 05/13] drm/xe/mmio: grab mem_access in xe_mmio_ioctl Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 06/13] drm/xe: ensure correct access_put ordering Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 07/13] drm/xe/pci: wrap probe with mem_access Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 08/13] drm/xe/display: use mem_access underneath Matthew Auld
2023-06-28  9:51   ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-06-29  9:19     ` Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 09/13] drm/xe/mmio: enforce xe_device_assert_mem_access Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 10/13] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from guc_ct_send Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` Matthew Auld [this message]
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 12/13] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from invalidation_vma Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 10:50 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 13/13] drm/xe: add lockdep annotation for xe_device_mem_access_get() Matthew Auld
2023-06-26 12:55 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits (rev2) Patchwork
2023-06-26 12:56 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2023-06-26 12:57 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:01 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:01 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:02 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2023-06-26 13:46 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info " Patchwork
2023-06-30  6:21 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v12 00/13] xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-06-30 11:07   ` Matthew Auld
2023-06-30 16:59     ` Dixit, Ashutosh

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=20230626105037.43780-26-matthew.auld@intel.com \
    --to=matthew.auld@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@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