From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: "Belgaumkar, Vinay" <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/xe: Inspect all forcewake bits for runtime idleness
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 17:58:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqR5mNSXKbICZKKU@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8a6a5fe1-4965-478e-ab80-71a4c353ed21@intel.com>
On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 04:00:40PM -0700, Belgaumkar, Vinay wrote:
>
> On 9/10/2026 3:17 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 02:28:22PM -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
> > > Inspect all GT force wake bits in the idle check for runtime suspend.
> > > This includes the ones not typically used by Xe KMD as well. Skip suspend
> > > when any of these bits are set, since it could mean someone is trying to
> > > keep the GT awake.
> > >
> > > Also add a call to pm_runtime_autosuspend() inside the idle check. This
> > > ensures a PM subsystem retry at a later time.
> > >
> > > v2: Only check the GT domain FW register. Other domains require a GT force
> > > wake applied before we can read their registers. Retry if idleness check
> > > fails (Sashiko)
> > >
> > > Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > > Assisted-by: Claude:Claude-Sonnet-5
> > > Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h | 1 +
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c | 6 +++++-
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h | 1 +
> > > 5 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> > > index 197e2197bd0a..0acb796c756c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> > > @@ -148,6 +148,31 @@ static int domain_sleep_wait(struct xe_gt *gt,
> > > return __domain_wait(gt, domain, false);
> > > }
> > > +/**
> > > + * xe_force_wake_any_bit_set - Return true if any force wake bit is set
> > > + * @fw: struct xe_force_wake
> > > + * @id: Force wake domain id
> > > + *
> > > + * Check if any multithread force wake bit is set for a given domain ID.
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: true if any bit in the force wake reg is set
> > > + */
> > > +bool xe_force_wake_any_bit_set(struct xe_force_wake *fw, enum xe_force_wake_domain_id id)
> > > +{
> > > + struct xe_gt *gt = fw->gt;
> > > + struct xe_force_wake_domain *domain = &fw->domains[id];
> > > + u32 val;
> > > +
> > > + val = xe_mmio_read32(>->mmio, domain->reg_ctl);
> > > + if (val & 0xFFFF) {
> > > + xe_gt_dbg(gt, "FW bit set in domain: %d, reg: 0x%x, val: 0x%x",
> > > + domain->id, domain->reg_ctl.addr, val);
> > > + return true;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return false;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /**
> > > * xe_force_wake_get() : Increase the domain refcount
> > > * @fw: struct xe_force_wake
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h
> > > index e2721f205d6c..53941e5a0fbe 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h
> > > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ void xe_force_wake_init_engines(struct xe_gt *gt,
> > > unsigned int __must_check xe_force_wake_get(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> > > enum xe_force_wake_domains domains);
> > > void xe_force_wake_put(struct xe_force_wake *fw, unsigned int fw_ref);
> > > +bool xe_force_wake_any_bit_set(struct xe_force_wake *fw, enum xe_force_wake_domain_id id);
> > > const char *xe_force_wake_domain_to_str(enum xe_force_wake_domain_id id);
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
> > > index ab4da1d9a9f1..a79d928ad75a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
> > > @@ -1438,10 +1438,14 @@ static int xe_pci_runtime_idle(struct device *dev)
> > > {
> > > struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> > > struct xe_device *xe = pdev_to_xe_device(pdev);
> > > + int ret;
> > > xe_pm_d3cold_allowed_toggle(xe);
> > > - return 0;
> > > + ret = xe_pm_check_runtime_idle(xe);
> > > + pm_runtime_autosuspend(dev);
> > do we really need this autosuspend here?
> > I believe this is what may have confused Sashiko.
> > And if needed it probably worth a separate patch with explanation.
>
> It was Sashiko's suggestion :). If we fail runtime_idle check due to someone
> holding a forcewake, there is no mechanism to re-trigger the autosuspend
> when they release the forcewake. I believe it is only retriggered on a
> pm_ref put(). So, system will be stuck in D0 state even after the forcewake
> has been released (until some execution happens and a pm_ref count goes to
> zero again). We only need the autosuspend when the check fails, so should be
> part of the same patch? I added it to both paths since it is a noop in the
> case where we succeed in the idle check (as it returns 0 to the PM
> subsystem).
Well, Sashiko is right about something that I had never realized,
runtime_suspend failure does schedule itself, the idle indeed doesn't.
That's awkward in the rpm infra, but not a driver job to do this call.
Also, I don't believe it is forever anyway. In the next put/get pair
it will be rearmed.
So, we can either accept this delayed rearm, we can move this check
to inside runtime_suspend and avoid the _idle or we can try to work
with linux core kernel to ensure _idle is rearmed.
But this call itself needs to be removed from here.
Thanks,
Rodrigo.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vinay.
>
> >
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > }
> > > static const struct dev_pm_ops xe_pm_ops = {
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> > > index f517bf453b54..e8d4cdbaef88 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c
> > > @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
> > > #include "xe_bo.h"
> > > #include "xe_bo_evict.h"
> > > #include "xe_device.h"
> > > +#include "xe_force_wake.h"
> > > +#include "xe_force_wake_types.h"
> > > #include "xe_ggtt.h"
> > > #include "xe_gt.h"
> > > #include "xe_gt_idle.h"
> > > @@ -1030,6 +1032,23 @@ void xe_pm_d3cold_allowed_toggle(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > mutex_unlock(&xe->d3cold.lock);
> > > }
> > > +/**
> > > + * xe_pm_check_runtime_idle() - Perform checks before signaling runtime idle.
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: 0 on success, non-zero on finding device not idle
> > > + */
> > > +int xe_pm_check_runtime_idle(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > +{
> > > + struct xe_gt *gt;
> > > + u8 id;
> > > +
> > > + for_each_gt(gt, xe, id)
> > > + if (xe_force_wake_any_bit_set(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FW_DOMAIN_ID_GT))
> > > + return -EBUSY;
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /**
> > > * xe_pm_module_init() - Perform xe_pm specific module initialization.
> > > *
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h
> > > index 6d5ab09cb769..d1f6a694b7c4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.h
> > > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ struct task_struct *xe_pm_read_callback_task(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > int xe_pm_block_on_suspend(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > void xe_pm_might_block_on_suspend(void);
> > > int xe_pm_module_init(void);
> > > +int xe_pm_check_runtime_idle(struct xe_device *xe);
> > > static inline void __xe_pm_runtime_noop(struct xe_device *xe) {}
> > > --
> > > 2.38.1
> > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-11 21:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-10 21:28 [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/xe: Inspect all forcewake bits for runtime idleness Vinay Belgaumkar
2026-09-10 21:28 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] drm/xe: Poll GT for C6 before D3 Vinay Belgaumkar
2026-09-10 21:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-10 22:23 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-10 21:41 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for series starting with [v2,1/2] drm/xe: Inspect all forcewake bits for runtime idleness Patchwork
2026-09-10 21:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " sashiko-bot
2026-09-10 21:53 ` Belgaumkar, Vinay
2026-09-10 22:17 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-10 23:00 ` Belgaumkar, Vinay
2026-09-11 21:58 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2026-09-11 23:02 ` Belgaumkar, Vinay
2026-09-14 13:03 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-10 22:35 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [v2,1/2] " Patchwork
2026-09-11 7:03 ` ✗ 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=aqR5mNSXKbICZKKU@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=vinay.belgaumkar@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