From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Suraj Kandpal <suraj.kandpal@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/display: Do not suspend resume dp mst during runtime
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 09:44:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zug2PvMXh8x_wM32@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZuSi4sR6hWtBc-ez@intel.com>
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 04:38:58PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 06:55:44AM +0530, Suraj Kandpal wrote:
> > Remove intel_dp_mst_suspend/resume from runtime suspend resume
> > sequences. It is incorrect as it depends on AUX transfers which
> > itself depend on the device being runtime resumed. This is
> > also why we see a lock_dep splat here.
> >
> > <4> [76.011119] kworker/4:2/192 is trying to acquire lock:
> > <4> [76.011122] ffff8881120b3210 (&mgr->lock#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> > drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr_suspend+0x33/0xd0 [drm_display_helper]
> > <4> [76.011142]
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > <4> [76.011144] ffffffffa0bc3420
> > (xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
> > xe_pm_runtime_suspend+0x51/0x3f0 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011223]
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > <4> [76.011226]
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > <4> [76.011229]
> > -> #2 (xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}:
> > <4> [76.011233] pm_runtime_lockdep_prime+0x2f/0x50 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011306] xe_pm_runtime_resume_and_get+0x29/0x90 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011377] intel_display_power_get+0x24/0x70 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011466] intel_digital_port_connected_locked+0x4c/0xf0
> > [xe]
> > <4> [76.011551] intel_dp_aux_xfer+0xb8/0x7c0 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011633] intel_dp_aux_transfer+0x166/0x2e0 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011715] drm_dp_dpcd_access+0x87/0x150
> > [drm_display_helper]
> > <4> [76.011726] drm_dp_dpcd_probe+0x3d/0xf0 [drm_display_helper]
> > <4> [76.011737] drm_dp_dpcd_read+0xdd/0x130 [drm_display_helper]
> > <4> [76.011747] intel_dp_get_colorimetry_status+0x3a/0x70 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011886] intel_dp_init_connector+0x4ff/0x1030 [xe]
> > <4> [76.011969] intel_ddi_init+0xc5b/0x1030 [xe]
> > <4> [76.012058] intel_bios_for_each_encoder+0x36/0x60 [xe]
> > <4> [76.012145] intel_setup_outputs+0x201/0x460 [xe]
> > <4> [76.012233] intel_display_driver_probe_nogem+0x155/0x1e0 [xe]
> > <4> [76.012320] xe_display_init_noaccel+0x27/0x70 [xe]
>
> could you please share the full in a link with me?
> I believe we can improve this. This seems incomplete...
Thanks for sharing the link:
https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/intel-xe/xe-1775-f0a6824d9e4ba2e1beabab4e3eeb195aa7fea167/re-dg2-17/igt@xe_pm@d3cold-mmap-vram.html#dmesg-warnings266
What about something like this:
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.11.0-rc3-xe #1 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
kworker/4:2/192 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff8881120b3210 (&mgr->lock#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr_suspend+0x33/0xd0 [drm_display_helper]
but task is already holding lock:
ffffffffa0bc3420 (xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: xe_pm_runtime_suspend+0x51/0x3f0 [xe]
-> #2 (xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}:
drm_dp_dpcd_access+0x87/0x150 [drm_display_helper]
xe_device_probe+0x8dd/0xbf0 [xe]
-> #1 (&aux->hw_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
drm_dp_dpcd_access+0x55/0x150 [drm_display_helper]
drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr_set_mst+0x8c/0x2e0 [drm_display_helper]
i915_hpd_poll_init_work+0x1d1/0x290 [xe]
-> #0 (&mgr->lock#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr_suspend+0x33/0xd0 [drm_display_helper]
intel_dp_mst_suspend+0x7e/0xa0 [xe]
xe_display_pm_suspend+0x59/0xc0 [xe]
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map);
lock(&aux->hw_mutex);
lock(xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map);
lock(&mgr->lock#2);
*** DEADLOCK ***
3 locks held by kworker/4:2/192:
#0: ffff888101546348 ((wq_completion)pm){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_scheduled_works+0x5bb/0x730
#1: ffffc900005b3e48 ((work_completion)(&dev->power.work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_scheduled_works+0x35b/0x730
#2: ffffffffa0bc3420 (xe_pm_runtime_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: xe_pm_runtime_suspend+0x51/0x3f0 [xe]
Call Trace:
[snip]
intel_dp_mst_suspend+0x7e/0xa0 [xe]
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suraj Kandpal <suraj.kandpal@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c | 7 +++++--
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> > index e65e7d70f989..39da79069b5a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> > @@ -331,7 +331,8 @@ static void __xe_display_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe, bool runtime)
> >
> > xe_display_flush_cleanup_work(xe);
> >
> > - intel_dp_mst_suspend(xe);
> > + if (!runtime)
> > + intel_dp_mst_suspend(xe);
> >
> > intel_hpd_cancel_work(xe);
> >
> > @@ -444,7 +445,9 @@ static void __xe_display_pm_resume(struct xe_device *xe, bool runtime)
> > intel_display_driver_resume_access(xe);
> >
> > /* MST sideband requires HPD interrupts enabled */
> > - intel_dp_mst_resume(xe);
> > + if (!runtime)
> > + intel_dp_mst_resume(xe);
> > +
> > if (!runtime && has_display(xe)) {
> > intel_display_driver_resume(xe);
> > drm_kms_helper_poll_enable(&xe->drm);
> > --
> > 2.43.2
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-16 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-12 1:25 [PATCH 0/2] Move some functions out of runtime sus/resume Suraj Kandpal
2024-09-12 1:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/display: Do not suspend resume dp mst during runtime Suraj Kandpal
2024-09-13 20:38 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-16 13:44 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2024-09-12 1:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/xe/display: Do not do intel_fbdev_set_suspend " Suraj Kandpal
2024-09-13 20:39 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-09-12 1:33 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Move some functions out of runtime sus/resume (rev2) Patchwork
2024-09-12 1:34 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-09-12 1:35 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-09-12 1:47 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-09-12 1:49 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-09-12 1:50 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-09-12 2:07 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-09-12 5:58 ` ✓ CI.FULL: " Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-09-11 15:27 [PATCH 0/2] Move some functions out of runtime sus/resume Suraj Kandpal
2024-09-11 15:27 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/display: Do not suspend resume dp mst during runtime Suraj Kandpal
2024-09-11 20:37 ` Rodrigo Vivi
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=Zug2PvMXh8x_wM32@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=suraj.kandpal@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).