From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Raag Jadav" <raag.jadav@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 08/10] drm/xe: Introduce temporary device wedging
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2026 11:37:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260821113758.006681F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260821112436.545405-9-raag.jadav@intel.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] Sleeping in atomic context due to `mutex_lock()` in `xe_device_declare_wedged()`.
- [High] Unprotected state modification and double-increment of `wedged.ref` in `prepare_device_for_reset()`.
- [High] Temporary wedged state from PCI error recovery leaks PM reference and triggers teardown assert if recovery aborts.
--
--- Patch [8]: [PATCH v10 08/10] drm/xe: Introduce temporary device wedging ---
commit 102094142d418b8de53397ac8e1fbe1c7ca46ae9
Author: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
drm/xe: Introduce temporary device wedging
This commit converts the boolean wedged flag to a reference count to allow
temporary wedged states. It also introduces a perm flag for permanent
wedging and a mutex to protect the wedged state transitions.
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1476,36 +1526,40 @@ void xe_device_declare_wedged(struct xe_device *xe)
> return;
> }
>
> - if (!atomic_xchg(&xe->wedged.flag, 1)) {
> - xe->needs_flr_on_fini = true;
> - xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe);
> + mutex_lock(&xe->wedged.lock);
[Severity: Critical]
Can this cause a sleeping in atomic context panic?
xe_device_declare_wedged() can be called from hard IRQ contexts, for
example:
xe_mert_irq_handler()
mert_handle_cat_error()
xe_device_declare_wedged()
Since mutex_lock() can sleep, taking it here from an interrupt handler
would lead to a scheduling while atomic regression.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci_error.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci_error.c
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci_error.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci_error.c
> @@ -25,8 +25,10 @@ static void prepare_device_for_reset(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> * xe_device_wedged_fini() releases runtime pm if wedged flag is set, so acquire a runtime
> * pm reference to avoid underflow.
> */
> - if (!atomic_xchg(&xe->wedged.flag, 1))
> - xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe);
> + xe_device_wedged_get(xe);
> +
> + /* TODO: We shouldn't be doing such ugly hacks, reuse FLR helpers and drop this. */
> + xe->wedged.perm = true;
[Severity: High]
Could this leak a reference and cause an assertion failure during device
teardown if the device is already wedged?
Unlike the old atomic_xchg code which checked if the device was already
wedged, xe_device_wedged_get() increments the reference count unconditionally.
If the device is already wedged from a previous event, the reference count
will be incremented twice.
During teardown, xe_device_wedged_fini() only drops a single reference
when wedged.perm is true:
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c:xe_device_wedged_fini() {
if (xe->wedged.perm)
xe_device_wedged_put(xe);
xe_assert(xe, !xe_device_wedged(xe));
}
Will the second reference be left behind and trip the xe_assert() check?
Also, should the state modification here be protected by xe->wedged.lock?
[ ... ]
> @@ -126,7 +128,7 @@ static pci_ers_result_t xe_pci_error_slot_reset(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> xe = pdev_to_xe_device(pdev);
>
> /* Wedge the device to prevent I/O operations till the resume callback */
> - atomic_set(&xe->wedged.flag, 1);
> + xe_device_wedged_get(xe);
[Severity: High]
If the PCI error recovery aborts or fails here, and the device is subsequently
unbound, will this leak the runtime PM reference?
This code acquires a temporary wedged reference but does not set
xe->wedged.perm to true. If the expected xe_pci_error_resume() is never
called due to a recovery failure, xe_device_wedged_fini() will see
xe->wedged.perm as false and skip dropping the reference, which would
ultimately trigger the xe_assert(xe, !xe_device_wedged(xe)) on teardown.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260821112436.545405-1-raag.jadav@intel.com?part=8
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-21 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-21 11:23 [PATCH v10 00/10] Introduce Xe PCIe FLR Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 01/10] drm/xe/uc_fw: Allow re-initializing firmware Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 02/10] drm/xe/guc_submit: Introduce guc_exec_queue_reinit_kernel() Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:52 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 03/10] drm/xe/gt: Introduce FLR helpers Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 04/10] drm/xe/bo_evict: Introduce xe_bo_restore_map() Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 05/10] drm/xe/exec_queue: Introduce xe_exec_queue_reinit() Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 06/10] drm/xe/migrate: Introduce xe_migrate_reinit() Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 07/10] drm/xe/pm: Introduce xe_device_suspend/resume() Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 08/10] drm/xe: Introduce temporary device wedging Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:37 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 09/10] drm/xe/pci: Introduce PCIe Function Level Reset Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:23 ` [PATCH v10 10/10] drm/xe/doc: Wire up PCI Error Handling Raag Jadav
2026-08-21 11:31 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Introduce Xe PCIe FLR (rev10) Patchwork
2026-08-21 11:33 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2026-08-21 12:37 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-08-21 14:38 ` ✓ Xe.CI.FULL: " 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=20260821113758.006681F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=raag.jadav@intel.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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