public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>,
	"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"keith.busch@intel.com" <keith.busch@intel.com>,
	"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: "irq/matrix: Spread interrupts on allocation" breaks nouveau in mainline kernel
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 13:23:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1516904638.5161.1.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801250945080.2020@nanos>

I think you are right, apologies. Glad to know this isn't a regression in the
IRQ handling code :). It looks like our nouveau problems are probably coming
from the fact that we don't just leave IRQs setup through suspend/resume which
as far as I can tell, is probably not the correct thing to do.

Going to get some patches onto the mailing list for this, thanks for the help!

On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 09:54 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018, Lyude Paul wrote:
> > Sorry about that! Let me clarify a little bit: this is a problem that shows
> > up
> > on mainline. Normally when we suspend the GPU in nouveau, we free the IRQs
> > it's using before going into suspend
> > (drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pci/base.c:88), then reserve IRQs again
> > on resume (drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pci/base.c:134). Since this
> > patch got pushed to mainline, the IRQ we get from request_irq() ends up
> > having
> > the same MSI vector as another device on the system:
> 
> It's not the same.
> 
> >     nouveau:
> >      parent:
> >         domain:  VECTOR
> >          hwirq:   0x2f
> >          chip:    APIC
> >           flags:   0x0
> >          Vector:    35
> >          Target:     1
> 
> Vector 35 on CPU1
> 
> >     After resume and allocating the interrupt for nouveau again, we get a
> > message
> >     from the kernel saying: 
> > 
> >     [  217.150787] do_IRQ: 1.35 No irq handler for vector
> 
> That's because there is a pending irq on the old vector for unknown reasons.
> 
> >     As well, nouveau ends up getting no interrupts from the card and as a
> > result
> >     fails to come back up:
> > 
> >     [  219.153049] nouveau 0000:22:00.0: DRM: EVO timeout
> >     [  220.226254] r8169 0000:1e:00.0 enp30s0: link up
> >     [  221.153054] nouveau 0000:22:00.0: DRM: base-0: timeout
> >     [  223.153528] nouveau 0000:22:00.0: DRM: base-0: timeout
> > 
> >     If we look through all of the other IRQ allocations, we'll find that now
> > two
> >     devices have the MSI vector 35:
> > 
> >     nouveau:
> >      parent:
> >         domain:  VECTOR
> >          hwirq:   0x2f
> >          chip:    APIC
> >           flags:   0x0
> >          Vector:    35
> >          Target:     1
> 
> Vector 35 on CPU1
> 
> >     and the PCI bridge (00:01.3 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
> > [AMD]
> >     Family 17h (Models 00h-0fh) PCIe GPP Bridge):
> > 
> >          parent:
> >             domain:  VECTOR
> >              hwirq:   0x19
> >              chip:    APIC
> >               flags:   0x0
> >              Vector:    35
> >              Target:     0
> 
> Vector 35 on CPU0. Same vector but different CPUs. So it's NOT the same
> thing.
> 
> The real issue is something completely different and the revert of this
> patch merily papers over the underlying problem. I'm pretty sure that you
> can trigger this even with the revert in place. Do the following before
> suspend:
> 
>     echo 2 >/proc/irq/$NOUVEAUIRQ/smp_affinity_list
> 
> Then do suspend/resume and you should end up with the same situation.
> 
> I can't tell from your dmesg, but I'm pretty confident that
> 
> >     [  217.150787] do_IRQ: 1.35 No irq handler for vector
> 
> happens _before_ the nouveau driver requests the irq again. Can please you
> add some printk to the code in question to verify that?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-25 18:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-23 22:01 "irq/matrix: Spread interrupts on allocation" breaks nouveau in mainline kernel Lyude Paul
2018-01-24  1:26 ` Lyude Paul
2018-01-24 12:52   ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-01-24 17:49     ` Lyude Paul
2018-01-24 19:13       ` Ghannam, Yazen
2018-01-24 19:56         ` Lyude Paul
2018-01-24 20:02           ` Lyude Paul
2018-01-25  3:29             ` Mike Galbraith
2018-01-25 18:29               ` Lyude Paul
2018-01-25  8:54           ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-01-25 18:23             ` Lyude Paul [this message]
2018-01-25 18:46               ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-01-25 19:25                 ` Lyude Paul
2018-01-25 20:12                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-01-24 12:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-01-24 13:38   ` Borislav Petkov

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=1516904638.5161.1.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=lyude@redhat.com \
    --cc=Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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