(REGRESSION bisected) Re: amdgpu errors (VM fault / GPU fault detected) with 5.19 merge window snapshots

[Christian König]

Am 01.06.22 um 16:55 schrieb Alex Deucher:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 8:58 AM Michal Kubecek <mkubecek at suse.cz> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:00:39AM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> while testing 5.19 merge window snapshots (commits babf0bb978e3 and
>>> 7e284070abe5), I keep getting errors like below. I have not seen them
>>> with 5.18 final or older.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [  247.150333] gmc_v8_0_process_interrupt: 46 callbacks suppressed
>>> [  247.150336] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu: GPU fault detected: 147 0x00020802 for process firefox pid 6101 thread firefox:cs0 pid 6116
>>> [  247.150339] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu:   VM_CONTEXT1_PROTECTION_FAULT_ADDR   0x00107800
>>> [  247.150340] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu:   VM_CONTEXT1_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS 0x0D008002
>>> [  247.150341] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu: VM fault (0x02, vmid 6, pasid 32780) at page 1079296, write from 'TC2' (0x54433200) (8)
>> [...]
>>> [  249.925909] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu: IH ring buffer overflow (0x000844C0, 0x00004A00, 0x000044D0)
>>> [  250.434986] [drm] Fence fallback timer expired on ring sdma0
>>> [  466.621568] gmc_v8_0_process_interrupt: 122 callbacks suppressed
>> [...]
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> There does not seem to be any apparent immediate problem with graphics
>>> but when running commit babf0bb978e3, there seemed to be a noticeable
>>> lag in some operations, e.g. when moving a window or repainting large
>>> part of the terminal window in konsole (no idea if it's related).
>>>
>>> My GPU is Radeon Pro WX 2100 (1002:6995). What other information should
>>> I collect to help debugging the issue?
>> Bisected to commit 5255e146c99a ("drm/amdgpu: rework TLB flushing").
>> There seem to be later commits depending on it so I did not test
>> a revert on top of current mainline.
>>
> @Christian Koenig, @Yang, Philip Any ideas?  I think there were some
> fix ups for this.  Maybe those just haven't hit the tree yet?

I need to double check, but as far as I know we have fixed all the fallout.

Could be that something didn't went upstream because it came to late for 
the merge window.

Christian.

>
> Alex
>
>
>> I should also mention that most commits tested as "bad" during the
>> bisect did behave much worse than current mainline (errors starting as
>> early as with sddm, visibly damaged screen content, sometimes even
>> crashes). But all of them issued messages similar to those above into
>> kernel log.
>>
>> Michal Kubecek