From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: <John.C.Harrison@intel.com>
Cc: <Intel-Xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] drm/xe: Move the coredump registration to the worker thread
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 15:41:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z0ZcmZZQ4x9Pns9w@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241126191857.2583429-3-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 11:18:56AM -0800, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>
> Adding lockdep checking to the coredump code showed that there was an
> existing violation. The dev_coredumpm_timeout() call is used to
> register the dump with the base coredump subsystem. However, that
> makes multiple memory allocations, only some of which use the GFP_
> flags passed in. So that also needs to be deferred to the worker
> function where it is safe to allocate with arbitrary flags.
>
> In order to not add protoypes for the callback functions, moving the
> _timeout call also means moving the worker thread function to later in
> the file.
>
I'd add a fixes tag + CC stable kernel when merging as we could deadlock
overselves if an devcoredump was done under extreme memory pressure.
Otherwise LGTM:
Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_devcoredump.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_devcoredump.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_devcoredump.c
> index f4c77f525819..5d19a4e3d5af 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_devcoredump.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_devcoredump.c
> @@ -167,31 +167,6 @@ static void xe_devcoredump_snapshot_free(struct xe_devcoredump_snapshot *ss)
> ss->vm = NULL;
> }
>
> -static void xe_devcoredump_deferred_snap_work(struct work_struct *work)
> -{
> - struct xe_devcoredump_snapshot *ss = container_of(work, typeof(*ss), work);
> - struct xe_devcoredump *coredump = container_of(ss, typeof(*coredump), snapshot);
> - unsigned int fw_ref;
> -
> - /* keep going if fw fails as we still want to save the memory and SW data */
> - fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(ss->gt), XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL);
> - if (!xe_force_wake_ref_has_domain(fw_ref, XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL))
> - xe_gt_info(ss->gt, "failed to get forcewake for coredump capture\n");
> - xe_vm_snapshot_capture_delayed(ss->vm);
> - xe_guc_exec_queue_snapshot_capture_delayed(ss->ge);
> - xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(ss->gt), fw_ref);
> -
> - /* Calculate devcoredump size */
> - ss->read.size = __xe_devcoredump_read(NULL, INT_MAX, coredump);
> -
> - ss->read.buffer = kvmalloc(ss->read.size, GFP_USER);
> - if (!ss->read.buffer)
> - return;
> -
> - __xe_devcoredump_read(ss->read.buffer, ss->read.size, coredump);
> - xe_devcoredump_snapshot_free(ss);
> -}
> -
> static ssize_t xe_devcoredump_read(char *buffer, loff_t offset,
> size_t count, void *data, size_t datalen)
> {
> @@ -240,6 +215,40 @@ static void xe_devcoredump_free(void *data)
> "Xe device coredump has been deleted.\n");
> }
>
> +static void xe_devcoredump_deferred_snap_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct xe_devcoredump_snapshot *ss = container_of(work, typeof(*ss), work);
> + struct xe_devcoredump *coredump = container_of(ss, typeof(*coredump), snapshot);
> + unsigned int fw_ref;
> +
> + /*
> + * NB: Despite passing a GFP_ flags parameter here, more allocations are done
> + * internally using GFP_KERNEL expliictly. Hence this call must be in the worker
> + * thread and not in the initial capture call.
> + */
> + dev_coredumpm_timeout(gt_to_xe(ss->gt)->drm.dev, THIS_MODULE, coredump, 0, GFP_KERNEL,
> + xe_devcoredump_read, xe_devcoredump_free,
> + XE_COREDUMP_TIMEOUT_JIFFIES);
> +
> + /* keep going if fw fails as we still want to save the memory and SW data */
> + fw_ref = xe_force_wake_get(gt_to_fw(ss->gt), XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL);
> + if (!xe_force_wake_ref_has_domain(fw_ref, XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL))
> + xe_gt_info(ss->gt, "failed to get forcewake for coredump capture\n");
> + xe_vm_snapshot_capture_delayed(ss->vm);
> + xe_guc_exec_queue_snapshot_capture_delayed(ss->ge);
> + xe_force_wake_put(gt_to_fw(ss->gt), fw_ref);
> +
> + /* Calculate devcoredump size */
> + ss->read.size = __xe_devcoredump_read(NULL, INT_MAX, coredump);
> +
> + ss->read.buffer = kvmalloc(ss->read.size, GFP_USER);
> + if (!ss->read.buffer)
> + return;
> +
> + __xe_devcoredump_read(ss->read.buffer, ss->read.size, coredump);
> + xe_devcoredump_snapshot_free(ss);
> +}
> +
> static void devcoredump_snapshot(struct xe_devcoredump *coredump,
> struct xe_exec_queue *q,
> struct xe_sched_job *job)
> @@ -328,10 +337,6 @@ void xe_devcoredump(struct xe_exec_queue *q, struct xe_sched_job *job, const cha
> drm_info(&xe->drm, "Xe device coredump has been created\n");
> drm_info(&xe->drm, "Check your /sys/class/drm/card%d/device/devcoredump/data\n",
> xe->drm.primary->index);
> -
> - dev_coredumpm_timeout(xe->drm.dev, THIS_MODULE, coredump, 0, GFP_KERNEL,
> - xe_devcoredump_read, xe_devcoredump_free,
> - XE_COREDUMP_TIMEOUT_JIFFIES);
> }
>
> static void xe_driver_devcoredump_fini(void *arg)
> --
> 2.47.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-26 23:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-26 19:18 [PATCH v5 0/3] drm/xe: Add devcoredump locking and reason string John.C.Harrison
2024-11-26 19:18 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] drm/xe: Add a reason string to the devcoredump John.C.Harrison
2024-11-26 19:18 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] drm/xe: Move the coredump registration to the worker thread John.C.Harrison
2024-11-26 23:41 ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2024-11-27 0:55 ` John Harrison
2024-11-26 19:18 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] drm/xe: Add mutex locking to devcoredump John.C.Harrison
2024-11-26 20:13 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe: Add devcoredump locking and reason string Patchwork
2024-11-26 20:13 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-11-26 20:14 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-11-26 20:32 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-11-26 20:35 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-11-26 20:36 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-11-26 20:54 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-11-26 22:23 ` ✗ 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=Z0ZcmZZQ4x9Pns9w@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com \
--to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=Intel-Xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=John.C.Harrison@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