From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: "Lis, Tomasz" <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 3/5] drm/xe/vf: Wait for default LRCs fixups before using
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2026 10:20:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aZimBOs1jp5I4NVU@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <be611722-8388-44b4-85ea-ce97094ff40f@intel.com>
On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 06:20:32PM +0100, Lis, Tomasz wrote:
>
> On 2/19/2026 9:40 PM, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 12:16:49PM -0800, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 12:21:56AM +0100, Tomasz Lis wrote:
> > > > When a context is being created during save/restore, the LRC creation
> > > > needs to wait for GGTT address space to be shifted. But it also needs
> > > > to have fixed default LRCs. This is mandatory to avoid the situation
> > > > where LRC will be created based on data from before the fixups, but
> > > > reference within exec queue will be set too late for fixups.
> > > >
> > > > This fixes an issue where contexts created during save/restore have
> > > > a large chance of having one unfixed LRC, due to the xe_lrc_create()
> > > > being synced for equal start to race with default LRC fixups.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Lis <tomasz.lis@intel.com>
> > > This is better than what is in place, so...
> > > Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> > A little quick on this RB, see my comment here [1].
> >
> > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/705610/?series=161287&rev=2#comment_1298253
> ack
> >
> > > But I think we need to close on why my suggestion in the previous rev
> > > isn't fixing the issue (off list discussion). If we go this series, then
> > We still need to figure out why my previous suggestion doesn't work.
>
> Right. Testing this is even harder than I expected though. Not only each
> verification required 1000+ runs, but I already confirmed that there is more
> than one place within `xe_lrc_create()` which causes an issue if not
> protected by the atomic..
>
> We need to, but this may take some time.
>
Ok. I think that with some of my suggestions—particularly those in
[1]—we can get a version of this series merged. I've reasoned through a
few minor changes and suggestions in [1]; with those, the layering looks
solid, race-free, and memory-safe, all of which the current code is not.
So let's move forward with this series, assuming we can align on my
comments in [1] and in the other patches.
Matt
[1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/705610/?series=161287&rev=2#comment_1298682
> -Tomasz
>
> > > my RB holds for future revs.
> > >
> > > Matt
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c | 24 +++++++++++------------
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h | 4 ++--
> > > > 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c
> > > > index e9396ad3390a..6eb561086e1c 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c
> > > > @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ 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;
> > > > - xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_ggtt(q->gt);
> > > > + xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_default_lrc(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)) {
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c
> > > > index 527ded3c9c22..5ce06031018d 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c
> > > > @@ -536,12 +536,6 @@ static int vf_get_ggtt_info(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > */
> > > > xe_ggtt_shift_nodes(tile->mem.ggtt, start);
> > > > - if (xe_sriov_vf_migration_supported(gt_to_xe(gt))) {
> > > > - WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.ggtt_need_fixes, false);
> > > > - smp_wmb(); /* Ensure above write visible before wake */
> > > > - wake_up_all(>->sriov.vf.migration.wq);
> > > > - }
> > > > -
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -844,6 +838,10 @@ static void xe_gt_sriov_vf_default_lrcs_hwsp_rebase(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > for_each_hw_engine(hwe, gt, id)
> > > > xe_default_lrc_update_memirq_regs_with_address(hwe);
> > > > +
> > > > + WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.default_lrcs_need_fixes, false);
> > > > + smp_wmb(); /* Ensure above write visible before wake */
> > > > + wake_up_all(>->sriov.vf.migration.wq);
> > Then with [1], move this wakeup to vf_post_migration_fixups after all fixups.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > > > }
> > > > static void vf_start_migration_recovery(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > @@ -858,7 +856,7 @@ static void vf_start_migration_recovery(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > !gt->sriov.vf.migration.recovery_teardown) {
> > > > gt->sriov.vf.migration.recovery_queued = true;
> > > > WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.recovery_inprogress, true);
> > > > - WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.ggtt_need_fixes, true);
> > > > + WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.default_lrcs_need_fixes, true);
> > > > smp_wmb(); /* Ensure above writes visible before wake */
> > > > xe_guc_ct_wake_waiters(>->uc.guc.ct);
> > > > @@ -1303,7 +1301,7 @@ static void vf_post_migration_abort(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > {
> > > > spin_lock_irq(>->sriov.vf.migration.lock);
> > > > WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.recovery_inprogress, false);
> > > > - WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.ggtt_need_fixes, false);
> > > > + WRITE_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.default_lrcs_need_fixes, false);
> > > > spin_unlock_irq(>->sriov.vf.migration.lock);
> > > > wake_up_all(>->sriov.vf.migration.wq);
> > > > @@ -1499,7 +1497,7 @@ bool xe_gt_sriov_vf_recovery_pending(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > return READ_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.recovery_inprogress);
> > > > }
> > > > -static bool vf_valid_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > +static bool vf_valid_default_lrc(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > {
> > > > struct xe_memirq *memirq = >_to_tile(gt)->memirq;
> > > > bool irq_pending = xe_device_uses_memirq(gt_to_xe(gt)) &&
> > > > @@ -1507,17 +1505,17 @@ static bool vf_valid_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > xe_gt_assert(gt, IS_SRIOV_VF(gt_to_xe(gt)));
> > > > - if (irq_pending || READ_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.ggtt_need_fixes))
> > > > + if (irq_pending || READ_ONCE(gt->sriov.vf.migration.default_lrcs_need_fixes))
> > > > return false;
> > > > return true;
> > > > }
> > > > /**
> > > > - * xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_ggtt() - VF wait for valid GGTT addresses
> > > > + * xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_default_lrc() - wait for valid GGTT refs in default LRCs
> > > > * @gt: the &xe_gt
> > > > */
> > > > -void xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > +void xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_default_lrc(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > {
> > > > int ret;
> > > > @@ -1526,7 +1524,7 @@ void xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt)
> > > > return;
> > > > ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(gt->sriov.vf.migration.wq,
> > > > - vf_valid_ggtt(gt),
> > > > + vf_valid_default_lrc(gt),
> > > > HZ * 5);
> > > > xe_gt_WARN_ON(gt, !ret);
> > > > }
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h
> > > > index 7d97189c2d3d..70232dc38f9a 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.h
> > > > @@ -39,6 +39,6 @@ void xe_gt_sriov_vf_print_config(struct xe_gt *gt, struct drm_printer *p);
> > > > void xe_gt_sriov_vf_print_runtime(struct xe_gt *gt, struct drm_printer *p);
> > > > void xe_gt_sriov_vf_print_version(struct xe_gt *gt, struct drm_printer *p);
> > > > -void xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_ggtt(struct xe_gt *gt);
> > > > +void xe_gt_sriov_vf_wait_valid_default_lrc(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 4ef881b9b662..8be181bf3cf3 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf_types.h
> > > > @@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ struct xe_gt_sriov_vf_migration {
> > > > bool recovery_queued;
> > > > /** @recovery_inprogress: VF post migration recovery in progress */
> > > > bool recovery_inprogress;
> > > > - /** @ggtt_need_fixes: VF GGTT needs fixes */
> > > > - bool ggtt_need_fixes;
> > > > + /** @default_lrcs_need_fixes: GGTT refs within default LRCs need fixes */
> > > > + bool default_lrcs_need_fixes;
> > > > };
> > > > /**
> > > > --
> > > > 2.25.1
> > > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-20 18:21 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 [this message]
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
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=aZimBOs1jp5I4NVU@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