From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Tejas Upadhyay" <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] drm/xe/vram: add decay-based reinstatement of soft-offlined VRAM pages
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2026 13:03:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-211135@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261112124329.2960272-6-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential
issues to consider:
- [High] drm/xe: missing configfs stub for
xe_configfs_get_bad_page_decay_secs()
- [Medium] drm/xe: missing decay_gc_work scheduling in
xe_ttm_vram_retry_queued_pages()
- [Medium] drm/xe: queued pages not promoted to HARD on repeat VRAM
fault
- [Low] drm/xe: xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_period() clamps period above
configured decay
--
commit 09a44ea2bd1a1ebe78a3a684e47f0dc29c05f989
Author: Tejas Upadhyay <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>
drm/xe/vram: add decay-based reinstatement of soft-offlined VRAM pages
This commit adds a per-VRAM-manager delayed work timer to reinstate
soft-offlined VRAM pages after a configurable decay interval, while
promoting pages with repeat faults to permanent hard retirement.
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h
> index 327b648944ffa..406b722247020 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ bool xe_configfs_get_psmi_enabled(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> bool xe_configfs_get_enable_multi_queue(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> u32 xe_configfs_get_migrate_ulls_period_ms(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> bool xe_configfs_get_disable_vram_page_offline(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> +u32 xe_configfs_get_bad_page_decay_secs(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_mid_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> enum xe_engine_class class,
> const u32 **cs);
[Severity: High]
Does this break the build when CONFIG_CONFIGFS_FS is not reachable?
__xe_ttm_vram_mgr_init() calls xe_configfs_get_bad_page_decay_secs()
unconditionally, but xe_configfs.h only declares it inside the
#if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_CONFIGFS_FS) block without a static inline stub in
the #else branch. Also, XE_BAD_PAGE_DECAY_SECS_DEFAULT is added in
xe_ttm_vram_mgr_types.h but never used (device_defaults in xe_configfs.c
open-codes 24 * 60 * 60).
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c
> index 36d47de8b11ba..ed0ca5f2b1449 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c
> @@ -355,6 +355,51 @@ static const struct ttm_resource_manager_func xe_ttm_vram_mgr_func = {
> .debug = xe_ttm_vram_mgr_debug
> };
>
> +static unsigned long xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_period(struct xe_ttm_vram_mgr *mgr)
> +{
> + unsigned long period = mgr->decay_interval_jiffies / 8;
> +
> + if (period < msecs_to_jiffies(60 * 1000))
> + period = msecs_to_jiffies(60 * 1000);
> + return period;
> +}
> +
> +static void xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_worker(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct xe_ttm_vram_mgr *mgr = container_of(to_delayed_work(work),
> + struct xe_ttm_vram_mgr,
> + decay_gc_work);
> + struct xe_ttm_vram_offline_resource *pos, *n;
> + struct xe_device *xe = ttm_to_xe_device(mgr->manager.bdev);
> + unsigned long now = jiffies;
> + unsigned long decay;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&mgr->lock);
> + decay = mgr->decay_interval_jiffies;
> + if (!decay)
> + goto reschedule;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, &mgr->offlined_pages, offlined_link) {
> + if (pos->mode != XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_SOFT)
> + continue;
> + if (!time_after(now, pos->last_seen + decay))
> + continue;
[Severity: Low]
When bad_page_decay_secs is configured between 1 and 59 seconds, does
xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_period() delay reinstatement to at least 60 seconds?
xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_period() clamps period up to 60 seconds without
capping it at mgr->decay_interval_jiffies. In addition, when
bad_page_decay_secs is 60 seconds, period equals decay, so if the worker
runs on the exact expiration tick (now == pos->last_seen + decay), the
strict time_after() check evaluates to false and defers reinstatement for
another 60 seconds.
[ ... ]
> @@ -725,8 +776,12 @@ static bool xe_ttm_vram_page_already_processed(struct xe_ttm_vram_mgr *mgr,
> lockdep_assert_held(&mgr->lock);
>
> list_for_each_entry(pos, &mgr->offlined_pages, offlined_link) {
> - if (pos->addr == addr)
> + if (pos->addr == addr) {
> + if (pos->mode == XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_SOFT)
> + pos->mode = XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_HARD;
> + pos->last_seen = jiffies;
> return true;
> + }
> }
>
> list_for_each_entry(pos, &mgr->queued_pages, queued_link) {
[Severity: Medium]
Should a repeat fault matching an entry on mgr->queued_pages also promote
pos->mode to XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_HARD and update pos->last_seen?
When a fault hits an allocated or busy page, the entry is placed on
mgr->queued_pages with XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_SOFT until the owning BO is freed.
If a second fault arrives at the same address before
xe_ttm_vram_retry_queued_pages() moves it to mgr->offlined_pages, the
mgr->queued_pages loop returns true (causing handle_page_offline() in
xe_ras.c to see -EEXIST and permanently retire the page in firmware via
XE_RAS_PAGE_ACTION_OFFLINE), but leaves pos->mode as XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_SOFT
so xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_worker() will later reinstate the page into the
buddy allocator.
> @@ -804,6 +859,8 @@ static int xe_ttm_vram_reserve_page_at_addr(struct xe_device *xe, u64 addr,
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nentry->blocks);
> nentry->status = XE_PAGE_RESERVE_PENDING;
> nentry->addr = addr;
> + nentry->mode = XE_PAGE_OFFLINE_SOFT;
> + nentry->last_seen = jiffies;
>
> if (block) {
> pbo = xe_ttm_vram_block_owner_get(xe, block);
> @@ -843,6 +900,11 @@ static int xe_ttm_vram_reserve_page_at_addr(struct xe_device *xe, u64 addr,
> }
> ++vram_mgr->n_offlined_pages;
> list_add(&nentry->offlined_link, &vram_mgr->offlined_pages);
> + if (vram_mgr->decay_interval_jiffies &&
> + !delayed_work_pending(&vram_mgr->decay_gc_work)) {
> + schedule_delayed_work(&vram_mgr->decay_gc_work,
> + xe_ttm_vram_decay_gc_period(vram_mgr));
> + }
> return ret;
> }
> }
[Severity: Medium]
Will soft-offlined pages that were allocated to a BO at fault time ever
schedule decay_gc_work?
When block is non-NULL (or when xe_ttm_vram_buddy_alloc() defers a busy
page), nentry is placed on vram_mgr->queued_pages and later moved to
mgr->offlined_pages by xe_ttm_vram_mgr_del() ->
xe_ttm_vram_retry_queued_pages():
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ttm_vram_mgr.c:xe_ttm_vram_retry_queued_pages() {
...
--mgr->n_queued_pages;
list_del(&pos->queued_link);
++mgr->n_offlined_pages;
list_add(&pos->offlined_link, &mgr->offlined_pages);
}
}
Because xe_ttm_vram_retry_queued_pages() does not schedule
mgr->decay_gc_work, any soft-offlined page that passes through
queued_pages will stay offline permanently unless an unallocated page also
faults and starts the worker.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261112124329.2960272-5-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-12 13:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-12 12:43 [PATCH V2 0/3] drm/xe/vram: decay-based reinstatement of soft-offlined VRAM pages Tejas Upadhyay
2026-11-12 12:43 ` [PATCH V2 1/3] drm/xe/vram: add " Tejas Upadhyay
2026-11-12 13:03 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-12 12:43 ` [PATCH V2 2/3] drm/xe/vram: don't let firmware-confirmed permanent bad pages decay back in Tejas Upadhyay
2026-11-12 12:54 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-12 12:43 ` [PATCH V2 3/3] drm/xe/vram: stop decay worker from rescheduling itself forever Tejas Upadhyay
2026-11-12 12:55 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-12 13:36 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for drm/xe/vram: decay-based reinstatement of soft-offlined VRAM pages Patchwork
2026-11-12 14:21 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " 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=sashiko-outbox-211135@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tejas.upadhyay@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