From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: use devm instead of drmm for managed bo
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 11:41:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d1758683-cc9f-4a6f-96dd-6180e91133a8@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240809231237.1503796-2-daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
On 10/08/2024 00:12, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> The BO cleanup touches the GGTT and therefore requires the HW to be
> available, so we need to use devm instead of drmm.
In the BO ggtt cleanup we have drm_dev_enter() to mark the critical
sections that needs HW interaction vs the bits that just touch SW stuff,
but looks like this only works once we have marked the device as
unplugged. If something blows up during the probe, then the mmio stuff
is still unmapped and set to NULL (mmio_fini or something IIRC), but the
dev_enter() still sees the device as attached as part of the later drmm
and we blow up.
It might make sense to tweak the driver to call the dev unplug() in the
error unwind during the probe sequence, that way the drm_dev_enter()
will catch this (I think). If we error out during probe, then device can
be considered unplugged at the end. Or perhaps we should anyway make
this change regardless of this patch?
My thinking with not converting xe_managed_* over to drmm was that we
anyway have to deal with userspace objects existing after the HW is
removed, and there we might also have to consider ggtt, like with
display surfaces. Also the BO is largely just software state and can be
tied to life cycle of the driver state, but I guess here this is
internal and closely tied to the operation of the HW.
>
> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel/-/issues/1160
> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
If calling unplug doesn't make sense, or is considered orthogonal and
only makes sense for other drmm users:
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> index 3295bc92d7aa..45652d7e6fa6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> @@ -1576,7 +1576,7 @@ struct xe_bo *xe_bo_create_from_data(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_tile *tile,
> return bo;
> }
>
> -static void __xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm(struct drm_device *drm, void *arg)
> +static void __xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm(void *arg)
> {
> xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm(arg);
> }
> @@ -1591,7 +1591,7 @@ struct xe_bo *xe_managed_bo_create_pin_map(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_tile
> if (IS_ERR(bo))
> return bo;
>
> - ret = drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, __xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm, bo);
> + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(xe->drm.dev, __xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm, bo);
> if (ret)
> return ERR_PTR(ret);
>
> @@ -1639,7 +1639,7 @@ int xe_managed_bo_reinit_in_vram(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_tile *tile, str
> if (IS_ERR(bo))
> return PTR_ERR(bo);
>
> - drmm_release_action(&xe->drm, __xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm, *src);
> + devm_release_action(xe->drm.dev, __xe_bo_unpin_map_no_vm, *src);
> *src = bo;
>
> return 0;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-12 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-09 23:12 [PATCH 0/3] uC-related drmm vs devm fixes Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-09 23:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] drm/xe: use devm instead of drmm for managed bo Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-10 4:39 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-08-12 10:41 ` Matthew Auld [this message]
2024-08-12 16:38 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-12 18:17 ` Matthew Auld
2024-08-12 18:43 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-09 23:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/xe/uc: Use managed bo for HuC and GSC objects Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-15 20:00 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-08-15 20:44 ` Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-09 23:12 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/xe/uc: Use devm to register cleanup that includes exec_queues Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
2024-08-09 23:46 ` [PATCH 0/3] uC-related drmm vs devm fixes Matthew Brost
2024-08-10 0:06 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-08-10 0:06 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-08-10 0:07 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-08-10 0:24 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-08-10 0:29 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-08-10 0:31 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-08-10 0:52 ` ✗ CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2024-08-10 3:44 ` ✗ CI.FULL: " 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=d1758683-cc9f-4a6f-96dd-6180e91133a8@intel.com \
--to=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@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