[PATCH] Increase tlb flush timeout for sriov

[Alex Deucher]

On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 5:02 AM Dusica Milinkovic
<dusica.milinkovic at amd.com> wrote:
>

Please include a patch description.  Why do you need a longer timeout?
 What problem does it fix?

> Signed-off-by: Dusica Milinkovic <dusica.milinkovic at amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c | 6 +++++-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c  | 6 +++++-
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c
> index 9ae8cdaa033e..6ab7d329916f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c
> @@ -419,6 +419,7 @@ static int gmc_v10_0_flush_gpu_tlb_pasid(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>         uint32_t seq;
>         uint16_t queried_pasid;
>         bool ret;
> +       uint32_t sriov_usec_timeout = 6000000;  /* wait for 12 * 500ms for SRIOV */
>         struct amdgpu_ring *ring = &adev->gfx.kiq.ring;
>         struct amdgpu_kiq *kiq = &adev->gfx.kiq;
>
> @@ -437,7 +438,10 @@ static int gmc_v10_0_flush_gpu_tlb_pasid(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>
>                 amdgpu_ring_commit(ring);
>                 spin_unlock(&adev->gfx.kiq.ring_lock);
> -               r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, adev->usec_timeout);
> +               if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev))
> +                       r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, sriov_usec_timeout);
> +               else
> +                       r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, adev->usec_timeout);

What about something like this?
u32 usec_timeout = amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev) ? 6000000 :
adev->usec_timeout;  /* wait for 12 * 500ms for SRIOV */
...
r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, usec_timeout);


>                 if (r < 1) {
>                         dev_err(adev->dev, "wait for kiq fence error: %ld.\n", r);
>                         return -ETIME;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c
> index 22761a3bb818..941a6b52fa72 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c
> @@ -896,6 +896,7 @@ static int gmc_v9_0_flush_gpu_tlb_pasid(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>         uint32_t seq;
>         uint16_t queried_pasid;
>         bool ret;
> +       uint32_t sriov_usec_timeout = 6000000;  /* wait for 12 * 500ms for SRIOV */
>         struct amdgpu_ring *ring = &adev->gfx.kiq.ring;
>         struct amdgpu_kiq *kiq = &adev->gfx.kiq;
>
> @@ -935,7 +936,10 @@ static int gmc_v9_0_flush_gpu_tlb_pasid(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>
>                 amdgpu_ring_commit(ring);
>                 spin_unlock(&adev->gfx.kiq.ring_lock);
> -               r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, adev->usec_timeout);
> +               if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev))
> +                       r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, sriov_usec_timeout);
> +               else
> +                       r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, adev->usec_timeout);

Same comment here.

Alex

>                 if (r < 1) {
>                         dev_err(adev->dev, "wait for kiq fence error: %ld.\n", r);
>                         up_read(&adev->reset_domain->sem);
> --
> 2.25.1
>