Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Tomasz Lis <tomasz.lis@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Michał Winiarski" <michal.winiarski@intel.com>,
	"Michał Wajdeczko" <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
	"Piotr Piórkowski" <piotr.piorkowski@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/xe/vf: Use marker to catch fixups during LRC creation
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2026 12:33:32 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aZdznFXPHUm6QxYD@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260218232159.1726873-6-tomasz.lis@intel.com>

On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 12:21:58AM +0100, Tomasz Lis wrote:
> When LRC is created during fixups, it may have invalid state. Ensure
> that all such situations are caught, so that LRC creation can be
> repeated.
> 
> Due to VM having arbitrarly set amount of CPU cores, it is possible
> to limit the amount to 1. In such case, there is a possibility that
> kernel will switch CPU contexts in a way which makes previously used
> detection methods miss a VF migration recovery running in parallel
> (by simply not switching to the LRC creation thread during recovery).
> 
> This possibility is not only theoretical, it was revealed by testing
> that in a small percentage of specially crafted test cases, the
> resulting LRC is damaged and causes GPU hang.
> 
> With the additional atomic value increased after fixups, any VF
> migration that avoided the usual detection during LRC creation will
> be caught.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Lis <tomasz.lis@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c        | 6 +++++-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c       | 7 +++++++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h       | 1 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h | 2 ++
>  4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c
> index 2ebf25a35557..a8d26fece38a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c
> @@ -308,15 +308,19 @@ static int __xe_exec_queue_init(struct xe_exec_queue *q, u32 exec_queue_flags)
>  	 */
>  	for (i = 0; i < q->width; ++i) {
>  		struct xe_lrc *lrc;
> +		int marker;
>  
>  		xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_default_lrc(q->gt);
> +		marker = xe_vf_migration_fixups_complete_count(q->gt);
> +
>  		lrc = xe_lrc_create(q->hwe, q->vm, q->replay_state,
>  				    xe_lrc_ring_size(), q->msix_vec, flags);
>  		if (IS_ERR(lrc)) {
>  			err = PTR_ERR(lrc);
>  			goto err_lrc;
>  		}
> -		if (!xe_gt_vf_valid_default_lrc(q->gt)) {
> +		if (!xe_gt_vf_valid_default_lrc(q->gt) ||
> +		    marker != xe_vf_migration_fixups_complete_count(q->gt)) {
>  			xe_lrc_put(lrc);

What exactly does this marker buy us? Couldn't patch #3 just signal
'gt->sriov.vf.migration.default_lrcs_need_fixes' where
'gt->sriov.vf.migration.fixups_complete' is incremented in this patch?

Then just drop this patch?

Matt

>  			i--;
>  			continue;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c
> index ff9fb9196486..240c53b07eb3 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c
> @@ -1254,6 +1254,11 @@ static size_t post_migration_scratch_size(struct xe_device *xe)
>  	return max(xe_lrc_reg_size(xe), LRC_WA_BB_SIZE);
>  }
>  
> +int xe_vf_migration_fixups_complete_count(struct xe_gt *gt)
> +{
> +	return atomic_read(&gt->sriov.vf.migration.fixups_complete);
> +}
> +
>  static int vf_post_migration_fixups(struct xe_gt *gt)
>  {
>  	void *buf = gt->sriov.vf.migration.scratch;
> @@ -1274,6 +1279,8 @@ static int vf_post_migration_fixups(struct xe_gt *gt)
>  	if (err)
>  		return err;
>  
> +	atomic_inc(&gt->sriov.vf.migration.fixups_complete);
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h
> index 8c21b8ab2f16..4651c7f3335c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h
> @@ -41,5 +41,6 @@ void xe_gt_sriov_vf_print_version(struct xe_gt *gt, struct drm_printer *p);
>  
>  bool xe_gt_vf_valid_default_lrc(struct xe_gt *gt);
>  void xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_default_lrc(struct xe_gt *gt);
> +int xe_vf_migration_fixups_complete_count(struct xe_gt *gt);
>  
>  #endif
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h
> index 8be181bf3cf3..41d6199e3508 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h
> @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ struct xe_gt_sriov_vf_migration {
>  	wait_queue_head_t wq;
>  	/** @scratch: Scratch memory for VF recovery */
>  	void *scratch;
> +	/** @fixups_complete: Counts completed fixups stages */
> +	atomic_t fixups_complete;
>  	/** @debug: Debug hooks for delaying migration */
>  	struct {
>  		/**
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2026-02-19 20:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-02-18 23:21 [PATCH v2 0/5] drm/xe/vf: Fix exec queue creation during post-migration recovery Tomasz Lis
2026-02-18 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] drm/xe/queue: Call fini on exec queue creation fail Tomasz Lis
2026-02-18 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] drm/xe/vf: Avoid LRC being freed while applying fixups Tomasz Lis
2026-02-19 19:00   ` Matthew Brost
2026-02-20 15:20     ` Lis, Tomasz
2026-02-20 16:20       ` Matthew Brost
2026-02-18 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] drm/xe/vf: Wait for default LRCs fixups before using Tomasz Lis
2026-02-19 20:16   ` Matthew Brost
2026-02-19 20:40     ` Matthew Brost
2026-02-20 17:20       ` Lis, Tomasz
2026-02-20 18:20         ` Matthew Brost
2026-02-18 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] drm/xe/vf: Redo LRC creation while in VF fixups Tomasz Lis
2026-02-18 23:21 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] drm/xe/vf: Use marker to catch fixups during LRC creation Tomasz Lis
2026-02-19 20:33   ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2026-02-20 16:43     ` Lis, Tomasz
2026-02-20 17:41       ` Matthew Brost
2026-02-18 23:34 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for drm/xe/vf: Fix exec queue creation during post-migration recovery (rev2) Patchwork
2026-02-19  0:35 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-02-19  1:49 ` ✗ 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=aZdznFXPHUm6QxYD@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com \
    --to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
    --cc=michal.winiarski@intel.com \
    --cc=piotr.piorkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=tomasz.lis@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