From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Niranjana Vishwanathapura <niranjana.vishwanathapura@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] drm/xe: Remove unwanted mutex locking
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 17:59:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZlelWCyAEtS2hUjW@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240529213925.22239-1-niranjana.vishwanathapura@intel.com>
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 02:39:25PM -0700, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
> Do not hold xef->exec_queue.lock mutex while parsing the xarray
> xef->exec_queue.xa in xe_file_close() as it is not needed and
> will cause an unwanted dependency between this lock and the vm->lock.
>
> This lock protects the exec queue lookup and reference taking which
> doesn't apply to this code path. When FD is closing, IOCTLs presumably
> can't be modifying the xarray.
>
> v2: Update commit text (Matt Brost)
> v3: Add more code comment (Rodrigo Vivi)
>
> Signed-off-by: Niranjana Vishwanathapura <niranjana.vishwanathapura@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jagmeet Randhawa <jagmeet.randhawa@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> index f04b11e45c2d..bf4c4306f6d3 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> @@ -96,12 +96,15 @@ static void xe_file_close(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file)
> struct xe_exec_queue *q;
> unsigned long idx;
>
> - mutex_lock(&xef->exec_queue.lock);
> + /*
> + * No need for exec_queue.lock here as there is no contention at
> + * this point.
I'm really sorry to be pedantic here. "But why is there no contention at this point?"
This remain unanswered here in the comment, and only a further code inspection or
a git-blame archeology would lead to the commit message with:
"When FD is closing, IOCTLs presumably can't be modifying the xarray."
> Taking exec_queue.lock here causes undue dependency
> + * on vm->lock taken during xe_exec_queue_kill().
> + */
> xa_for_each(&xef->exec_queue.xa, idx, q) {
> xe_exec_queue_kill(q);
> xe_exec_queue_put(q);
> }
> - mutex_unlock(&xef->exec_queue.lock);
> xa_destroy(&xef->exec_queue.xa);
> mutex_destroy(&xef->exec_queue.lock);
> mutex_lock(&xef->vm.lock);
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-29 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-29 21:39 [PATCH v3] drm/xe: Remove unwanted mutex locking Niranjana Vishwanathapura
2024-05-29 21:45 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe: Remove unwanted mutex locking (rev3) Patchwork
2024-05-29 21:45 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-05-29 21:46 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-05-29 21:58 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-05-29 21:58 ` ✗ CI.Hooks: failure " Patchwork
2024-05-29 21:59 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2024-05-29 21:59 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: success " Patchwork
2024-05-29 22:32 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-05-30 1:26 ` ✓ 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=ZlelWCyAEtS2hUjW@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=niranjana.vishwanathapura@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