From: "Nilawar, Badal" <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
To: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>,
<intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
"Nirmoy Das" <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/23] drm/xe: Error handling in xe_force_wake_get()
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:57:01 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b76291a0-5f02-4601-86ec-c6da607705f1@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240924121641.1045763-2-himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
Hi Himal,
On 24-09-2024 17:46, Himal Prasad Ghimiray wrote:
> If an acknowledgment timeout occurs for a domain awake request, do not
s/acknowledgement/forcewake acknowledgement/
> increment the reference count for the domain. This ensures that
> subsequent _get calls do not incorrectly assume the domain is awake. The
> return value is a mask of domains whose reference counts were
> incremented, and these domains need to be released using
> xe_force_wake_put.
>
> The caller needs to compare the return value with the input domains to
> determine the success or failure of the operation and decide whether to
> continue or return accordingly.
>
> While at it, add simple kernel-doc for xe_force_wake_get()
>
> v3
> - Use explicit type for mask (Michal/Badal)
> - Improve kernel-doc (Michal)
> - Use unsigned int instead of abusing enum (Michal)
>
> v5
> - Use unsigned int for return (MattB/Badal/Rodrigo)
> - use xe_gt_WARN for domain awake ack failure (Badal/Rodrigo)
>
> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
> Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> Cc: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> index a64c14757c84..d190aa93be90 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> @@ -150,28 +150,49 @@ static int domain_sleep_wait(struct xe_gt *gt,
> (ffs(tmp__) - 1))) && \
> domain__->reg_ctl.addr)
>
> -int xe_force_wake_get(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> - enum xe_force_wake_domains domains)
> +/**
> + * xe_force_wake_get() : Increase the domain refcount
> + * @fw: struct xe_force_wake
> + * @domains: forcewake domains to get refcount on
> + *
> + * This function takes references for the input @domains and wakes them if
> + * they are asleep.
> + *
> + * Return: mask of refcount increased domains. If the return value is
> + * equal to the input parameter @domains, the operation is considered
> + * successful. Otherwise, the operation is considered a failure, and
> + * the caller should handle the failure case, potentially returning
> + * -ETIMEDOUT.
> + */
Here especially for FORCEWAKE_ALL case caller has to strictly compare
return mask with FORCEWAKE_ALL instead of just if(!ret) and return.
Which is fine.
> +unsigned int xe_force_wake_get(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> + enum xe_force_wake_domains domains)
> {
> struct xe_gt *gt = fw->gt;
> struct xe_force_wake_domain *domain;
> - enum xe_force_wake_domains tmp, woken = 0;
> + unsigned int tmp, ret, awake_rqst = 0, awake_failed = 0;
> unsigned long flags;
> - int ret = 0;
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&fw->lock, flags);
> for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, domains, fw, tmp) {
> if (!domain->ref++) {
> - woken |= BIT(domain->id);
> + awake_rqst |= BIT(domain->id);
> domain_wake(gt, domain);
> }
> }
> - for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, woken, fw, tmp) {
> - ret |= domain_wake_wait(gt, domain);
> + for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, awake_rqst, fw, tmp) {
> + if (domain_wake_wait(gt, domain) == 0) {
> + fw->awake_domains |= BIT(domain->id);
> + } else {
> + awake_failed |= BIT(domain->id);
> + --domain->ref;
> + }
> }
> - fw->awake_domains |= woken;
> + ret = (domains & ~awake_failed);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fw->lock, flags);
>
> + xe_gt_WARN(gt, awake_failed, "domain%s %#x failed to acknowledgment awake\n",
Forcewake domain%s failed to acknowledge awake request.
> + str_plural(hweight_long(awake_failed)), awake_failed);
> +
> return ret;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h
> index a2577672f4e3..6c1ade39139b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.h
> @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ void xe_force_wake_init_gt(struct xe_gt *gt,
> struct xe_force_wake *fw);
> void xe_force_wake_init_engines(struct xe_gt *gt,
> struct xe_force_wake *fw);
> -int xe_force_wake_get(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> - enum xe_force_wake_domains domains);
> +unsigned int xe_force_wake_get(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> + enum xe_force_wake_domains domains);
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
Regards,
Badal
> int xe_force_wake_put(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> enum xe_force_wake_domains domains);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-24 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-24 12:16 [PATCH v5 00/23] Fix xe_force_wake_get() failure handling Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 01/23] drm/xe: Error handling in xe_force_wake_get() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 17:27 ` Nilawar, Badal [this message]
2024-09-25 6:21 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-25 12:01 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-09-25 16:36 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-25 17:20 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-09-25 18:14 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-26 11:03 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-09-26 11:43 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 02/23] drm/xe: Modify xe_force_wake_put to handle _get returned mask Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-25 10:27 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-09-25 14:03 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-09-25 16:44 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 03/23] drm/xe/device: Update handling of xe_force_wake_get return Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 04/23] drm/xe/hdcp: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 05/23] drm/xe/gsc: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 06/23] drm/xe/gt: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 07/23] drm/xe/xe_gt_idle: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 08/23] drm/xe/devcoredump: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 09/23] drm/xe/tests/mocs: Update xe_force_wake_get() return handling Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 10/23] drm/xe/mocs: Update handling of xe_force_wake_get return Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 11/23] drm/xe/xe_drm_client: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 12/23] drm/xe/xe_gt_debugfs: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 13/23] drm/xe/guc: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 14/23] drm/xe/huc: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 15/23] drm/xe/oa: Handle force_wake_get failure in xe_oa_stream_init() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 16/23] drm/xe/pat: Update handling of xe_force_wake_get return Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 17/23] drm/xe/gt_tlb_invalidation_ggtt: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 18/23] drm/xe/xe_reg_sr: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 19/23] drm/xe/query: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 20/23] drm/xe/vram: " Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 21/23] drm/xe: forcewake debugfs open fails on xe_forcewake_get failure Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 22/23] drm/xe: Ensure __must_check for xe_force_wake_get() return Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-24 12:16 ` [PATCH v5 23/23] drm/xe: Change return type to void for xe_force_wake_put Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-09-25 10:30 ` Nilawar, Badal
2024-09-25 14:07 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-09-25 16:46 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-09-26 1:04 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Fix xe_force_wake_get() failure handling (rev5) Patchwork
2024-09-26 1:04 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-09-26 1:05 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-09-26 1:17 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-09-26 1:19 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-09-26 1:20 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-09-26 1:42 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-09-26 8:17 ` ✗ 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=b76291a0-5f02-4601-86ec-c6da607705f1@intel.com \
--to=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
--cc=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
--cc=nirmoy.das@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@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