Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/xe: Fix shrinker accounting double-subtraction on nested external pins
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2026 13:56:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261001135632.E95B41F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261001134018.111553-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] mm: permanent shrinker accounting leak for backup BOs
--

commit 816b78b38575a1b5008feed73113ef8809607017
Author: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>

drm/xe: Fix shrinker accounting double-subtraction on nested external pins

This commit fixes a double-subtraction in the shrinker accounting when
handling nested external pins by introducing xe_bo_pin_account() and
xe_bo_unpin_account(). These wrappers ensure shrinker pages are only updated
during the initial pin and final unpin transitions.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> index f2ab9bf43a864..2fbbba7cf4b00 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> @@ -465,6 +465,66 @@ static void xe_ttm_tt_account_subtract(struct xe_device *xe, struct ttm_tt *tt)
>  		xe_shrinker_mod_pages(xe->mem.shrinker, -(long)tt->num_pages, 0);
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Account @bo's pages as pinned for the shrinker. Removes @bo's pages
> + * from the shrinker's shrinkable / purgeable counts on the transition
> + * from unpinned to pinned. Must be called with @bo's dma-resv held,
> + * after &ttm_buffer_object.pin_count has been incremented by
> + * ttm_bo_pin(). Safe to call unconditionally regardless of which pin
> + * path (kernel, external, framebuffer, backup object, ...) is pinning
> + * @bo, since it only acts on the true 0->1 pin_count transition.
> + */
> +static void xe_bo_account_pin(struct xe_bo *bo)
> +{
> +	struct xe_device *xe = xe_bo_device(bo);
> +
> +	if (bo->ttm.pin_count == 1 && bo->ttm.ttm && ttm_tt_is_populated(bo->ttm.ttm))
> +		xe_ttm_tt_account_subtract(xe, bo->ttm.ttm);

[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does this logic cause a
shrinker accounting underflow when pinning imported dma-bufs?

When an imported dma-buf is pinned (for example, through framebuffer creation
or external buffer sharing), xe_bo_pin_account() is called, which evaluates
ttm_tt_is_populated(). For imported dma-bufs, the TTM core sets this flag.

However, xe_ttm_tt_populate() returns early for imported dma-bufs:

xe_ttm_tt_populate() {
    if ((tt->page_flags & TTM_TT_FLAG_EXTERNAL) &&
        !(tt->page_flags & TTM_TT_FLAG_EXTERNAL_MAPPABLE))
            return 0;
    ...
}

Because they return early, they are never added to the shrinker in the first
place. 

Could subtracting them here unconditionally when ttm_tt_is_populated() is true
subtract pages that were never added, causing an unsigned underflow of
shrinkable_pages?

> +}
> +

[ ... ]

> @@ -1396,7 +1456,7 @@ int xe_bo_notifier_prepare_pinned(struct xe_bo *bo)
>  		}
>  
>  		backup->parent_obj = xe_bo_get(bo); /* Released by bo_destroy */
> -		ttm_bo_pin(&backup->ttm);
> +		xe_bo_pin_account(backup);

[Severity: Medium]
Does this introduce a permanent shrinker accounting leak for backup BOs?

In xe_bo_notifier_prepare_pinned(), a new system memory backup BO is created
and immediately pinned here via the new xe_bo_pin_account() helper. At this
point, the BO's TT is not yet populated (as ttm_bo_move_null() defers it),
so xe_bo_account_pin() skips subtracting the pages:

xe_bo_account_pin() {
    if (bo->ttm.pin_count == 1 && bo->ttm.ttm &&
        ttm_tt_is_populated(bo->ttm.ttm))
            xe_ttm_tt_account_subtract(xe, bo->ttm.ttm);
}

Later, when the BO is populated (for example, during eviction copy), it is
added to the shrinker via xe_ttm_tt_populate().

When the BO is eventually unpinned in xe_bo_restore_pinned() or
xe_bo_notifier_unprepare_pinned(), xe_bo_account_unpin() sees that it is now
populated and adds the pages to the shrinker again. 

Can this double-addition permanently inflate the shrinkable_pages counter?

>  		bo->backup_obj = backup;
>  	}
>

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261001134018.111553-1-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-01 13:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-01 13:40 [PATCH v2 0/2] drm/xe: Fix two bo pin/unpin accounting bugs Thomas Hellström
2026-10-01 13:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/xe: Fix shrinker accounting double-subtraction on nested external pins Thomas Hellström
2026-10-01 13:56   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-01 17:34   ` Matthew Auld
2026-10-01 13:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/xe: Fix stale pinned_link entry when fb-pin performs the final unpin Thomas Hellström
2026-10-01 17:26   ` Matthew Auld
2026-10-02  9:52     ` Thomas Hellström
2026-10-02 11:59       ` Matthew Auld
2026-10-01 17:44   ` Matthew Auld
2026-10-01 13:50 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for drm/xe: Fix two bo pin/unpin accounting bugs Patchwork
2026-10-01 18:11 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-10-01 22:58 ` ✗ Xe.CI.FULL: failure " 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=20261001135632.E95B41F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@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