[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Cancel delayed work when GFXOFF is disabled

Lazar, Lijo lijo.lazar at amd.com
Mon Aug 16 04:13:49 UTC 2021



On 8/13/2021 9:30 PM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On 2021-08-13 5:07 p.m., Lazar, Lijo wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/13/2021 8:10 PM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>> On 2021-08-13 4:14 p.m., Lazar, Lijo wrote:
>>>> On 8/13/2021 7:04 PM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-08-13 1:50 p.m., Lazar, Lijo wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/13/2021 3:59 PM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Michel Dänzer <mdaenzer at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> schedule_delayed_work does not push back the work if it was already
>>>>>>> scheduled before, so amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off ran ~100 ms
>>>>>>> after the first time GFXOFF was disabled and re-enabled, even if GFXOFF
>>>>>>> was disabled and re-enabled again during those 100 ms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This resulted in frame drops / stutter with the upcoming mutter 41
>>>>>>> release on Navi 14, due to constantly enabling GFXOFF in the HW and
>>>>>>> disabling it again (for getting the GPU clock counter).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To fix this, call cancel_delayed_work_sync when GFXOFF transitions from
>>>>>>> enabled to disabled. This makes sure the delayed work will be scheduled
>>>>>>> as intended in the reverse case.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In order to avoid a deadlock, amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off needs
>>>>>>> to use mutex_trylock instead of mutex_lock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> v2:
>>>>>>> * Use cancel_delayed_work_sync & mutex_trylock instead of
>>>>>>>       mod_delayed_work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer <mdaenzer at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>      drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>>>>>>>      drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gfx.c    | 13 +++++++------
>>>>>>>      drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gfx.h    |  3 +++
>>>>>>>      3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>>>>>> index f3fd5ec710b6..8b025f70706c 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>>>>>> @@ -2777,7 +2777,16 @@ static void amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off(struct work_struct *work)
>>>>>>>          struct amdgpu_device *adev =
>>>>>>>              container_of(work, struct amdgpu_device, gfx.gfx_off_delay_work.work);
>>>>>>>      -    mutex_lock(&adev->gfx.gfx_off_mutex);
>>>>>>> +    /* mutex_lock could deadlock with cancel_delayed_work_sync in amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl. */
>>>>>>> +    if (!mutex_trylock(&adev->gfx.gfx_off_mutex)) {
>>>>>>> +        /* If there's a bug which causes amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl to be called with enable=true
>>>>>>> +         * when adev->gfx.gfx_off_req_count is already 0, we might race with that.
>>>>>>> +         * Re-schedule to make sure gfx off will be re-enabled in the HW eventually.
>>>>>>> +         */
>>>>>>> +        schedule_delayed_work(&adev->gfx.gfx_off_delay_work, AMDGPU_GFX_OFF_DELAY_ENABLE);
>>>>>>> +        return;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is not needed and is just creating another thread to contend for mutex.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still not sure what you mean by that. What other thread?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I meant it schedules another workitem and delays GFXOFF enablement further. For ex: if it was another function like gfx_off_status holding the lock at the time of check.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The checks below take care of enabling gfxoff correctly. If it's already in gfx_off state, it doesn't do anything. So I don't see why this change is needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> mutex_trylock is needed to prevent the deadlock discussed before and below.
>>>>>
>>>>> schedule_delayed_work is needed due to this scenario hinted at by the comment:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl locks mutex, calls schedule_delayed_work
>>>>> 2. amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off runs, calls mutex_trylock, which fails
>>>>>
>>>>> GFXOFF would never get re-enabled in HW in this case (until amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl calls schedule_delayed_work again).
>>>>>
>>>>> (cancel_delayed_work_sync guarantees there's no pending delayed work when it returns, even if amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off calls schedule_delayed_work)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think we need to explain based on the original code before. There is an asssumption here that the only other contention of this mutex is with the gfx_off_ctrl function.
>>>
>>> Not really.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As far as I understand if the work has already started running when schedule_delayed_work is called, it will insert another in the work queue after delay. Based on that understanding I didn't find a problem with the original code.
>>>
>>> Original code as in without this patch or the mod_delayed_work patch? If so, the problem is not when the work has already started running. It's that when it hasn't started running yet, schedule_delayed_work doesn't change the timeout for the already scheduled work, so it ends up enabling GFXOFF earlier than intended (and thus at all in scenarios when it's not supposed to).
>>>
>>
>> I meant the original implementation of amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off().
>>
>>
>> If you indeed want to use _sync, there is a small problem with this implementation also which is roughly equivalent to the original problem you faced.
>>
>> amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl(disable) locks mutex
>> calls cancel_delayed_work_sync
>> amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off already started running
>>      mutex_trylock fails and schedules another one
>> amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl(enable)
>>      schedules_delayed_work() - Delay is not extended, it's the same as when it's rearmed from work item.
> 
> 
> This cannot happen. When cancel_delayed_work_sync returns, it guarantees that the delayed work is not scheduled
> , even if amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off called schedule_delayed_work. In other words, it cancels that as well.
> 

Ah, thanks! Didn't know that it will cancel out re-queued work also. In 
that case, may be reduce the delay for re-queuing it - say 50% or 25% of 
AMDGPU_GFX_OFF_DELAY_ENABLE. Instead of delaying GFXOFF further, it's 
better to enable it faster as it's losing out to another enable or some 
other function.

>> Probably, overthinking about the solution. Looking back, mod_ version is simpler :). May be just delay it further everytime there is a call with enable instead of doing it only for req_cnt==0?
> 
> That has some issues as well:
> 
> * Still prone to the "amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off re-enables GFXOFF immediately after amdgpu_gfx_off_ctrl dropped req_count to 0" race if the former starts running between when the latter locks the mutex and calls mod_delayed_work.
> * If the work is not scheduled yet, mod_delayed_work would schedule it, even if req_count > 0, in which case it couldn't actually enable GFXOFF.
> 
> Conceptually, making sure the work is never scheduled while req_count > 0 seems cleaner to me. It's the same principle as in the JPEG/UVD/VCE/VCN ring functions (which are presumably hotter paths than these amdgpu_gfx_off functions) I needlessly modified in patch 2.
> 
> (It also means amdgpu_device_delay_enable_gfx_off technically no longer needs to test req_count or gfx_off_state; I can spin a v3 for that if desired)
> 

Would still keep the "gfx_off_state check" to avoid executing the 
sequence due to buggy enable calls coming when it's already in gfxoff 
(if at all that happens).

Thanks,
Lijo


More information about the amd-gfx mailing list