From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 08/10] drm/xe/ggtt: prime ggtt->lock against FS_RECLAIM
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 12:25:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230717112502.32379-20-matthew.auld@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230717112502.32379-12-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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-17 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-17 11:25 [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 00/10] xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 01/10] drm/xe: fix xe_device_mem_access_get() races Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 02/10] drm/xe/vm: tidy up xe_runtime_pm usage Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 03/10] drm/xe/debugfs: grab mem_access around forcewake Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 04/10] drm/xe/guc_pc: add missing mem_access for freq_rpe_show Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 05/10] drm/xe/mmio: grab mem_access in xe_mmio_ioctl Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 06/10] drm/xe: ensure correct access_put ordering Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 07/10] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from guc_ct_send Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` Matthew Auld [this message]
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 09/10] drm/xe: drop xe_device_mem_access_get() from invalidation_vma Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:25 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v14 10/10] drm/xe: add lockdep annotation for xe_device_mem_access_get() Matthew Auld
2023-07-17 11:28 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits (rev4) Patchwork
2023-07-17 11:28 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2023-07-17 11:29 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2023-07-17 11:33 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-07-17 11:34 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2023-07-17 11:35 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2023-07-18 12:50 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for xe_device_mem_access fixes and related bits (rev6) Patchwork
2023-07-18 12:50 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2023-07-18 12:51 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2023-07-18 12:55 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-07-18 12:56 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2023-07-18 12:57 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2023-07-18 13:31 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info " 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=20230717112502.32379-20-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