[regression, bisected, pci/iommu] Bug 216865 - Black screen when amdgpu started during 6.2-rc1 boot with AMD IOMMU enabled

[Bjorn Helgaas]

[+cc Christian, Xinhui, amd-gfx]

On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 01:48:11PM +0800, Baolu Lu wrote:
> On 1/5/23 11:27 PM, Felix Kuehling wrote:
> > Am 2023-01-05 um 09:46 schrieb Deucher, Alexander:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Hegde, Vasant <Vasant.Hegde at amd.com>
> > > > On 1/5/2023 4:07 PM, Baolu Lu wrote:
> > > > > On 2023/1/5 18:27, Vasant Hegde wrote:
> > > > > > On 1/5/2023 6:39 AM, Matt Fagnani wrote:
> > > > > > > I built 6.2-rc2 with the patch applied. The same black
> > > > > > > screen problem happened with 6.2-rc2 with the patch. I
> > > > > > > tried to use early kdump with 6.2-rc2 with the patch
> > > > > > > twice by panicking the kernel with sysrq+alt+c after the
> > > > > > > black screen happened. The system rebooted after about
> > > > > > > 10-20 seconds both times, but no kdump and dmesg files
> > > > > > > were saved in /var/crash. I'm attaching the lspci -vvv
> > > > > > > output as requested. ...

> > > > > > Looking into lspci output, it doesn't list ACS feature
> > > > > > for Graphics card. So with your fix it didn't enable PASID
> > > > > > and hence it failed to boot. ...

> > > > > So do you mind telling why does the PASID need to be enabled
> > > > > for the graphic device? Or in another word, what does the
> > > > > graphic driver use the PASID for? ...

> > > The GPU driver uses the pasid for shared virtual memory between
> > > the CPU and GPU.  I.e., so that the user apps can use the same
> > > virtual address space on the GPU and the CPU.  It also uses
> > > pasid to take advantage of recoverable device page faults using
> > > PRS. ...

> > Agreed. This applies to GPU computing on some older AMD APUs that
> > take advantage of memory coherence and IOMMUv2 address translation
> > to create a shared virtual address space between the CPU and GPU.
> > In this case it seems to be a Carrizo APU. It is also true for
> > Raven APUs. ...

> Thanks for the explanation.
> 
> This is actually the problem that commit 201007ef707a was trying to
> fix.  The PCIe fabric routes Memory Requests based on the TLP
> address, ignoring any PASID (PCIe r6.0, sec 2.2.10.4), so a TLP with
> PASID that should go upstream to the IOMMU may instead be routed as
> a P2P Request if its address falls in a bridge window.
> 
> In SVA case, the IOMMU shares the address space of a user
> application.  The user application side has no knowledge about the
> PCI bridge window.  It is entirely possible that the device is
> programed with a P2P address and results in a disaster.

Is this stalled?  We explored the idea of changing the PCI core so
that for devices that use ATS/PRI, we could enable PASID without
checking for ACS [1], but IIUC we ultimately concluded that it was
based on a misunderstanding of how ATS Translation Requests are routed
and that an AMD driver change would be required [2].

So it seems like we still have this regression, and we're running out
of time before v6.2.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230114073420.759989-1-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y91X9MeCOsa67CC6@nvidia.com/