Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Oak Zeng <oak.zeng@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<Thomas.Hellstrom@linux.intel.com>, <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Allow scratch page under fault mode for certain platform
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 14:10:52 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z74/7JpxfZf5LIQN@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250213022331.265424-3-oak.zeng@intel.com>

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 09:23:31PM -0500, Oak Zeng wrote:

I replied to the wrong versions... Please generate the patches with:

git format-patch -v<n>

Where <n> is the version number. This will help avoiding replying to the
wrong patch.

Copy / pasting my reply here...

> Normally scratch page is not allowed when a vm is operate under page
> fault mode, i.e., in the existing codes, DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_SCRATCH_PAGE
> and DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_FAULT_MODE are mutual exclusive. The reason
> is fault mode relies on recoverable page to work, while scratch page
> can mute recoverable page fault.
> 
> On xe2 and xe3, out of bound prefetch can cause page fault and further
> system hang because xekmd can't resolve such page fault. SYCL and OCL
> language runtime requires out of bound prefetch to be silently dropped
> without causing any functional problem, thus the existing behavior
> doesn't meet language runtime requirement.
> 
> At the same time, HW prefetching can cause page fault interrupt. Due to
> page fault interrupt overhead (i.e., need Guc and KMD involved to fix
> the page fault), HW prefetching can be slowed by many orders of magnitude.
> 
> Fix those problems by allowing scratch page under fault mode for xe2 and
> xe3. With scratch page in place, HW prefetching could always hit scratch
> page instead of causing interrupt.
> 
> A side effect is, scratch page could hide application program error.
> Application out of bound accesses are hided by scratch page mapping,
> instead of get reported to user.
>

I'd include the IGT information in the cover letter, not the patch.
 
> igt test: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/144334/. Test result on
> BMG:
> 
> root@DUT1130BMGFRD:/home/szeng/dii-tools/igt-public/build/tests# ./xe_exec_fault_mode --run-subtest scratch-fault
> IGT-Version: 1.30-gde1a3cb42 (x86_64) (Linux: 6.13.0-xe x86_64)
> Using IGT_SRANDOM=1738684805 for randomisation
> Opened device: /dev/dri/card0
> Starting subtest: scratch-fault
> Subtest scratch-fault: SUCCESS (0.080s)
> 
> Without this series, the test result is:
> 
> root@DUT1130BMGFRD:/home/szeng/dii-tools/igt-public/build/tests# ./xe_exec_fault_mode --run-subtest scratch-fault
> IGT-Version: 1.30-gde1a3cb42 (x86_64) (Linux: 6.13.0-xe x86_64)
> Using IGT_SRANDOM=1738686046 for randomisation
> Opened device: /dev/dri/card0
> Starting subtest: scratch-fault
> (xe_exec_fault_mode:5047) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function test_exec, file ../tests/intel/xe_exec_fault_mode.c:349:
> (xe_exec_fault_mode:5047) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: __xe_wait_ufence(fd, &exec_sync[i], 0xdeadbeefdeadbeefull, exec_queues[i % n_exec_queues], &timeout) == 0
> (xe_exec_fault_mode:5047) CRITICAL: Last errno: 62, Timer expired
> (xe_exec_fault_mode:5047) CRITICAL: error: -62 != 0
> Stack trace:
>   #0 ../lib/igt_core.c:2266 __igt_fail_assert()
>   #1 ../tests/intel/xe_exec_fault_mode.c:346 test_exec()
>   #2 ../tests/intel/xe_exec_fault_mode.c:537 __igt_unique____real_main407()
>   #3 ../tests/intel/xe_exec_fault_mode.c:407 main()
>   #4 ../sysdeps/nptl/libc_start_call_main.h:74 __libc_start_call_main()
>   #5 ../csu/libc-start.c:128 __libc_start_main@@GLIBC_2.34()
>   #6 [_start+0x2e]
> Subtest scratch-fault failed.
> 
> v2: Refine commit message (Thomas)
> 
> v3: Move the scratch page flag check to after scratch page wa (Thomas)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oak Zeng <oak.zeng@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> index 813d893d9b63..c2dfd0ade403 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> @@ -1766,7 +1766,8 @@ int xe_vm_create_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, args->flags & DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_SCRATCH_PAGE &&
> -			 args->flags & DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_FAULT_MODE))
> +			 args->flags & DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_FAULT_MODE &&
> +			 !(NEEDS_SCRATCH(xe))))

Same comment as patch #1, I'd drop this macro.

Do we need a query uAPI so the UMD can test upon process open if the VM
supports scratch page + faults? Or should we just not restrict VM
scratch page + faults ever and have it choose based on platform
recommnedation?

Matt

>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, !(args->flags & DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_LR_MODE) &&
> -- 
> 2.26.3
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-25 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-13  2:23 [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: Introduced needs_scratch bit in device descriptor Oak Zeng
2025-02-13  2:16 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for series starting with [1/3] " Patchwork
2025-02-13  2:16 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-02-13  2:18 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-02-13  2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/xe: Clear scratch page on vm_bind Oak Zeng
2025-02-19 17:47   ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-19 20:19     ` Zeng, Oak
2025-02-19 20:46       ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-20 21:09         ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-25 22:54   ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-26 18:49     ` Zeng, Oak
2025-02-26 21:44       ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-13  2:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Allow scratch page under fault mode for certain platform Oak Zeng
2025-02-25 22:10   ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2025-02-26 22:12     ` Zeng, Oak
2025-02-27  0:22       ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-13  2:34 ` ✓ CI.Build: success for series starting with [1/3] drm/xe: Introduced needs_scratch bit in device descriptor Patchwork
2025-02-13  2:37 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-02-13  2:38 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2025-02-13  2:58 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-02-13 14:56 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-02-24 15:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Zeng, Oak
2025-02-24 17:27   ` Matthew Brost
2025-02-25 22:13 ` Matthew Brost
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-02-06 21:38 Oak Zeng
2025-02-06 21:38 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Allow scratch page under fault mode for certain platform Oak Zeng
2025-02-06  2:11 [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: Introduced needs_scratch bit in device descriptor Oak Zeng
2025-02-06  2:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Allow scratch page under fault mode for certain platform Oak Zeng
2025-02-04 18:45 [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: Introduced needs_scratch bit in device descriptor Oak Zeng
2025-02-04 18:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Allow scratch page under fault mode for certain platform Oak Zeng
2025-02-05 13:14   ` Thomas Hellström
2025-02-06  1:54     ` Zeng, Oak
2025-02-06  9:29       ` Thomas Hellström
2025-02-06 15:14         ` Zeng, Oak
2025-02-25 22:05   ` Matthew Brost
2025-01-28 22:21 [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: Add a function to zap page table by address range Oak Zeng
2025-01-28 22:21 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe: Allow scratch page under fault mode for certain platform Oak Zeng
2025-01-28 23:05   ` Cavitt, Jonathan
2025-01-29  8:52   ` Thomas Hellström
2025-01-29 16:41     ` Matthew Brost

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=Z74/7JpxfZf5LIQN@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com \
    --to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=Thomas.Hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jonathan.cavitt@intel.com \
    --cc=oak.zeng@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