From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D5862222B5 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:58:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739455109; cv=none; b=B36dJH6HGLvj+5z8xUv4UBmKxEMMF+Mxm8N9Z+cduEvN/AKkLuzKMmLJnbjQsIYUGvnlBl4jPmhhBRgclaT1dHIw5iHtyE2+Xo+f03qBndHd4hJQthkCzvwP0yGZkdOJhXKD0iSGKSTdqYxCOead22a2dqMKumPVn6sTH+q+los= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739455109; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bHZeZfKNTDogIf6Y2kInrbME7S2+Xgh/ojub8j6miqU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QYzzTwg5VzJC3j0KBip0tG6h0kT+I98TQrIJSniWQElCMU9Cq8DoSt/mHSpnbe91jfd8jl3ceklxy0dWm2yKwV5+eueRuiZQ4zzyrfArCNKQf129BmQT2AxRcqysR1KcZYTy8nVQf5yiWdBOhnZ7bIEdXn1wlkgzXTA8FzhxzLA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=b66ZRD10; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="b66ZRD10" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1739455108; x=1770991108; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=bHZeZfKNTDogIf6Y2kInrbME7S2+Xgh/ojub8j6miqU=; b=b66ZRD10sEWUzUUJIc04hDsOFMqQTM9wjdcpgJOvTlXu0tFEqh6DBXHR 7TM2d2dwPj72+4f3lSBtyvzkxZSNG2SupUxh9qozgtivV7mXyuB6wSTrk zKmsNzjq+CjloQdOAfTTN04acXF/QOFzatlwqIcf7+31rN7yWHvOI+hce dfF89Gn75lofiDh6XHjPKnGtWbMQJtvORummRg4L6L8EkktEahwPkgOYn UY0VJS9CDBREbuumvJC7VW4kryutDhQBNrbptCGVrjl5jkplc8EInYRwR t6klsbYJcMBitsit2HNCG7X0iCucX/XVE4IHzEnmYcjpzf7fHeS4VLS6t Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rpiyYuIBQdGQwhNOY6d6SA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: vngqxW1yQ/GVCZ6lxd/3bg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11344"; a="40020309" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,282,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="40020309" Received: from orviesa003.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.143]) by orvoesa111.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Feb 2025 05:58:27 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: pIb+x+DWRsaD5bHpJKZ8cg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: l2gAYjgQSwOJnNjr+/4Zgw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,199,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="118081434" Received: from apaszkie-mobl2.apaszkie-mobl2 (HELO mwauld-desk.intel.com) ([10.245.245.31]) by ORVIESA003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Feb 2025 05:58:26 -0800 From: Matthew Auld To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Matthew Brost , =?UTF-8?q?Thomas=20Hellstr=C3=B6m?= , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/userptr: fix EFAULT handling Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:58:09 +0000 Message-ID: <20250213135808.189144-3-matthew.auld@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.48.1 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Currently we treat EFAULT from hmm_range_fault() as a non-fatal error when called from xe_vm_userptr_pin() with the idea that we want to avoid killing the entire vm and chucking an error, under the assumption that the user just did an unmap or something, and has no intention of actually touching that memory from the GPU. At this point we have already zapped the PTEs so any access should generate a page fault, and if the pin fails there also it will then become fatal. However it looks like it's possible for the userptr vma to still be on the rebind list in preempt_rebind_work_func(), if we had to retry the pin again due to something happening in the caller before we did the rebind step, but in the meantime needing to re-validate the userptr and this time hitting the EFAULT. This might explain an internal user report of hitting: [ 191.738349] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 157 at drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_res_cursor.h:158 xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738551] Workqueue: xe-ordered-wq preempt_rebind_work_func [xe] [ 191.738616] RIP: 0010:xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738690] Call Trace: [ 191.738692] [ 191.738694] ? show_regs+0x69/0x80 [ 191.738698] ? __warn+0x93/0x1a0 [ 191.738703] ? xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738759] ? report_bug+0x18f/0x1a0 [ 191.738764] ? handle_bug+0x63/0xa0 [ 191.738767] ? exc_invalid_op+0x19/0x70 [ 191.738770] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20 [ 191.738777] ? xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738834] ? ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 [ 191.738849] bind_op_prepare+0x105/0x7b0 [xe] [ 191.738906] ? dma_resv_reserve_fences+0x301/0x380 [ 191.738912] xe_pt_update_ops_prepare+0x28c/0x4b0 [xe] [ 191.738966] ? kmemleak_alloc+0x4b/0x80 [ 191.738973] ops_execute+0x188/0x9d0 [xe] [ 191.739036] xe_vm_rebind+0x4ce/0x5a0 [xe] [ 191.739098] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x4d/0x60 [ 191.739112] preempt_rebind_work_func+0x76f/0xd00 [xe] Followed by NPD, when running some workload, since the sg was never actually populated but the vma is still marked for rebind when it should be skipped for this special EFAULT case. And from the logs it does seem like we hit this special EFAULT case before the explosions. Fixes: 521db22a1d70 ("drm/xe: Invalidate userptr VMA on page pin fault") Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld Cc: Matthew Brost Cc: Thomas Hellström Cc: # v6.10+ --- drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c index d664f2e418b2..1caee9cbeafb 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c @@ -692,6 +692,17 @@ int xe_vm_userptr_pin(struct xe_vm *vm) xe_vm_unlock(vm); if (err) return err; + + /* + * We might have already done the pin once already, but then had to retry + * before the re-bind happended, due some other condition in the caller, but + * in the meantime the userptr got dinged by the notifier such that we need + * to revalidate here, but this time we hit the EFAULT. In such a case + * make sure we remove ourselves from the rebind list to avoid going down in + * flames. + */ + if (!list_empty(&uvma->vma.combined_links.rebind)) + list_del_init(&uvma->vma.combined_links.rebind); } else { if (err < 0) return err; -- 2.48.1