Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Tejas Upadhyay" <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V17 11/12] drm/xe/uapi: Expose ban reason in EXEC_QUEUE_GET_PROPERTY_BAN
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 10:58:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260818105824.8482E1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260818104055.3833974-25-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Missing memory barrier in guc_exec_queue_reset_status allows speculative reads to mask PAGE_OFFLINE reason.
- [Medium] Non-LR (traditional) exec queues fail to inherit the PAGE_OFFLINE ban reason when a VM page table is purged.
- [Medium] The PAGE_OFFLINE ban reason is masked and lost for multi-queue setups if a secondary queue's LRC BO is purged.
--

--- Patch [11]: [PATCH V17 11/12] drm/xe/uapi: Expose ban reason in EXEC_QUEUE_GET_PROPERTY_BAN ---
commit 45e4d4a3182723f090e735c94ca31b96821f9856
Author: Tejas Upadhyay <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>

drm/xe/uapi: Expose ban reason in EXEC_QUEUE_GET_PROPERTY_BAN

Extend DRM_XE_EXEC_QUEUE_GET_PROPERTY_BAN to return a bitmask indicating
the reason for the ban, rather than a simple boolean.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> @@ -2570,13 +2580,25 @@ static void guc_exec_queue_multi_queue_drop_suspend(struct xe_exec_queue *q)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static bool guc_exec_queue_reset_status(struct xe_exec_queue *q)
> +static u64 guc_exec_queue_reset_status(struct xe_exec_queue *q)
>  {
> -	if (xe_exec_queue_is_multi_queue_secondary(q) &&
> -	    guc_exec_queue_reset_status(xe_exec_queue_multi_queue_primary(q)))
> -		return true;
> +	if (xe_exec_queue_is_multi_queue_secondary(q)) {
> +		u64 status = guc_exec_queue_reset_status(xe_exec_queue_multi_queue_primary(q));
> +
> +		if (status)
> +			return status;
> +	}

[Severity: Medium]
If a secondary queue's LRC BO is purged, xe_ttm_vram_purge_page() will tag
the secondary queue with the PAGE_OFFLINE ban reason. However, since this
delegates to the primary queue here, won't this mask the secondary queue's
specific reason if the primary queue defaults to GPU_HANG?

> +
> +	if (exec_queue_reset(q) || exec_queue_killed_or_banned_or_wedged(q)) {
> +		u64 reason = atomic_read_acquire(&q->ban_reason);

[Severity: Medium]
Is a memory barrier needed here before reading the ban reason?

When a CPU reads the queue status in guc_exec_queue_reset_status()
concurrently with xe_ttm_vram_purge_page() updating it, there is a control
dependency (the if block) before using atomic_read_acquire() on the ban
reason.

Since control dependencies do not order subsequent reads against preceding
reads, could the CPU speculatively execute the ban_reason read before the
state read resolves?

If it observes a 0, it would incorrectly default to GPU_HANG instead of
PAGE_OFFLINE. Should we add an smp_rmb() before reading the ban_reason?

> +
> +		/* If no specific reason was recorded, default to GPU hang */
> +		if (!reason)
> +			reason = DRM_XE_EXEC_QUEUE_BAN_REASON_GPU_HANG;
> +		return reason;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c
> @@ -596,7 +597,12 @@ static int xe_ttm_vram_purge_page(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_bo *bo)
>  	xe_bo_unlock(bo);
>  	/*  Ban VM if BO is PPGTT */
>  	if (vm && (flags & XE_BO_FLAG_PAGETABLE)) {
> +		struct xe_exec_queue *eq;
> +
>  		down_write(&vm->lock);
> +		list_for_each_entry(eq, &vm->preempt.exec_queues, lr.link)
> +			atomic_or(DRM_XE_EXEC_QUEUE_BAN_REASON_PAGE_OFFLINE, &eq->ban_reason);

[Severity: Medium]
Does this loop miss non-LR (traditional) exec queues sharing the same VM?

This iterates strictly over vm->preempt.exec_queues, which only contains LR
queues. If a non-LR queue is associated with a purged VM, it seems it will
fail to inherit the PAGE_OFFLINE ban reason.

It would then eventually time out, trigger the TDR, and be tagged with the
default GPU_HANG reason, which might provide misleading information to
userspace.

> +		smp_wmb(); /* Force all queue bits to be visible before killing the VM */
>  		xe_vm_kill(vm, true);
>  		up_write(&vm->lock);
>  	}

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260818104055.3833974-14-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com?part=11

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-18 10:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-18 10:40 [PATCH V17 00/12] Add memory page offlining support Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:40 ` [PATCH V17 01/12] drm/xe: Link VRAM object with gpu buddy Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:40 ` [PATCH V17 02/12] drm/xe: Link LRC BO and its execution Queue Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:40 ` [PATCH V17 03/12] drm/xe: Extend BO purge to handle vram pages as well Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:40 ` [PATCH V17 04/12] drm/xe/bo: Make xe_bo_is_user() public Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 05/12] drm/xe: Guard teardown paths against purged BOs Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 11:06   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 06/12] drm/xe/vram: Extract buddy alloc and free helpers Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 07/12] drm/xe/vram: Add page offline data structures and lifecycle Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:51   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 08/12] drm/xe/vram: Add VRAM page offline fault handler Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 11:01   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 09/12] drm/xe/configfs: Add vram bad page reservation policy Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:57   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 10/12] drm/xe: Add sysfs interface for bad gpu vram pages Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:54   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 11/12] drm/xe/uapi: Expose ban reason in EXEC_QUEUE_GET_PROPERTY_BAN Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:58   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-18 10:41 ` [PATCH V17 12/12] drm/xe: Add fault-inject based VRAM page offline injection Tejas Upadhyay
2026-08-18 10:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-18 10:49 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for Add memory page offlining support (rev19) Patchwork
2026-08-18 11:47 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for Add memory page offlining support (rev20) Patchwork
2026-08-18 12:28 ` ✗ Xe.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2026-08-18 12:59 ` [PATCH V17 00/12] Add memory page offlining support Rodrigo Vivi
2026-08-18 13:24   ` Upadhyay, Tejas
2026-08-18 13:12 ` ✗ Xe.CI.FULL: failure for Add memory page offlining support (rev20) 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=20260818105824.8482E1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=tejas.upadhyay@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