From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe: fix unbalanced rpm put() with fence_fini()
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:51:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9ec9180-754e-495c-aecc-759469610694@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZwVoNDSywONjEye0@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com>
On 08/10/2024 18:13, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 11:47:24AM +0100, Matthew Auld wrote:
>> Currently we can call fence_fini() twice if something goes wrong when
>> sending the GuC CT for the tlb request, since we signal the fence and
>> return an error, leading to the caller also calling fini() on the error
>> path in the case of stack version of the flow, which leads to an extra
>> rpm put() which might later cause device to enter suspend when it
>> shouldn't. It looks like we can just drop the fini() call since the
>> fence signaller side will already call this for us.
>>
>> There are known mysterious splats with device going to sleep even with
>> an rpm ref, and this could be one candidate.
>>
>> Fixes: 0a382f9bc5dc ("drm/xe: Hold a PM ref when GT TLB invalidations are inflight")
>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>> Cc: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c | 26 ++++++++-------------
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.h | 1 -
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 8 ++-----
>> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
>> index 98616de0c5bb..3eca8d680533 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c
>> @@ -37,6 +37,12 @@ static long tlb_timeout_jiffies(struct xe_gt *gt)
>> return hw_tlb_timeout + 2 * delay;
>> }
>>
>> +static void xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini(struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence)
>> +{
>
> To catch a double call of this:
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!fence->gt))
> return;
It should hit an NPD here, if called twice. But I guess it's easy enough
not to crash here and have a warn instead. Will add this.
>
> Everything else LGTM. With that:
> Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>
>> + xe_pm_runtime_put(gt_to_xe(fence->gt));
>> + fence->gt = NULL; /* fini() should be called once */
>> +}
>> +
>> static void
>> __invalidation_fence_signal(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence)
>> {
>> @@ -204,7 +210,7 @@ static int send_tlb_invalidation(struct xe_guc *guc,
>> tlb_timeout_jiffies(gt));
>> }
>> spin_unlock_irq(>->tlb_invalidation.pending_lock);
>> - } else if (ret < 0) {
>> + } else {
>> __invalidation_fence_signal(xe, fence);
>> }
>> if (!ret) {
>> @@ -267,10 +273,8 @@ int xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
>>
>> xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init(gt, &fence, true);
>> ret = xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_guc(gt, &fence);
>> - if (ret < 0) {
>> - xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini(&fence);
>> + if (ret)
>> return ret;
>> - }
>>
>> xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_wait(&fence);
>> } else if (xe_device_uc_enabled(xe) && !xe_device_wedged(xe)) {
>> @@ -498,7 +502,8 @@ static const struct dma_fence_ops invalidation_fence_ops = {
>> * @stack: fence is stack variable
>> *
>> * Initialize TLB invalidation fence for use. xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini
>> - * must be called if fence is not signaled.
>> + * will be automatically called when fence is signalled (all fences must signal),
>> + * even on error.
>> */
>> void xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init(struct xe_gt *gt,
>> struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence,
>> @@ -518,14 +523,3 @@ void xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init(struct xe_gt *gt,
>> dma_fence_get(&fence->base);
>> fence->gt = gt;
>> }
>> -
>> -/**
>> - * xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini - Finalize TLB invalidation fence
>> - * @fence: TLB invalidation fence to finalize
>> - *
>> - * Drop PM ref which fence took durinig init.
>> - */
>> -void xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini(struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence)
>> -{
>> - xe_pm_runtime_put(gt_to_xe(fence->gt));
>> -}
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.h
>> index a84065fa324c..f430d5797af7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.h
>> @@ -28,7 +28,6 @@ int xe_guc_tlb_invalidation_done_handler(struct xe_guc *guc, u32 *msg, u32 len);
>> void xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init(struct xe_gt *gt,
>> struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence,
>> bool stack);
>> -void xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini(struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence);
>>
>> static inline void
>> xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_wait(struct xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence *fence)
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
>> index ce9dca4d4e87..c99380271de6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
>> @@ -3199,10 +3199,8 @@ int xe_vm_invalidate_vma(struct xe_vma *vma)
>>
>> ret = xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_vma(tile->primary_gt,
>> &fence[fence_id], vma);
>> - if (ret < 0) {
>> - xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini(&fence[fence_id]);
>> + if (ret)
>> goto wait;
>> - }
>> ++fence_id;
>>
>> if (!tile->media_gt)
>> @@ -3214,10 +3212,8 @@ int xe_vm_invalidate_vma(struct xe_vma *vma)
>>
>> ret = xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_vma(tile->media_gt,
>> &fence[fence_id], vma);
>> - if (ret < 0) {
>> - xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_fini(&fence[fence_id]);
>> + if (ret)
>> goto wait;
>> - }
>> ++fence_id;
>> }
>> }
>> --
>> 2.46.2
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-09 7:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-08 10:47 [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe: fix unbalanced rpm put() with fence_fini() Matthew Auld
2024-10-08 10:47 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/xe: fix unbalanced rpm put() with declare_wedged() Matthew Auld
2024-10-08 17:14 ` Matthew Brost
2024-10-08 10:53 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for series starting with [1/2] drm/xe: fix unbalanced rpm put() with fence_fini() Patchwork
2024-10-08 10:53 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 10:54 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 11:06 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 11:08 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 11:10 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 11:33 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-10-08 17:13 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Matthew Brost
2024-10-09 7:51 ` Matthew Auld [this message]
2024-10-08 18:11 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure for series starting with [1/2] " 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=a9ec9180-754e-495c-aecc-759469610694@intel.com \
--to=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=nirmoy.das@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