[PATCH 2/2] drm/amdkfd: use cache GTT buffer for PQ and wb pool

[Liu, Monk]

[AMD Official Use Only - AMD Internal Distribution Only]

Hi Lijo

This is the patch we verified before:

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_kernel_queue.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_kernel_queue.c
index 4843dcb9a5f7..39553c7648eb 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_kernel_queue.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_kernel_queue.c
@@ -308,10 +308,12 @@ int kq_submit_packet(struct kernel_queue *kq)

        if (kq->dev->kfd->device_info.doorbell_size == 8) {
                *kq->wptr64_kernel = kq->pending_wptr64;
+               mb();
                write_kernel_doorbell64(kq->queue->properties.doorbell_ptr,
                                        kq->pending_wptr64);
        } else {
                *kq->wptr_kernel = kq->pending_wptr;
+               mb();
                write_kernel_doorbell(kq->queue->properties.doorbell_ptr,
                                        kq->pending_wptr);
        }


This mb() doesn't resolve the problem during customer's testing, I also thought of MB() first in beginning like you and Christian ...
The mb() here shall resolve the re-ordering between WPTR and doorbell kicking so GPU won't fetch stalled data from WPTR polling once it receives notification from doorbell kicking.
(in SR-IOV we set doorbell mode to force GPU still fetch from WPTR polling area, doorbell kicking is just to notify GPU)

And by your theory: mb() shall flush the WC storage buffer to memory, thus, this mb() shall also make sure that the ring buffer is not holding stalled data anymore, right ?
But we still hit hang and get stalled data from dump.

Maybe we need to put mb() in another place ? can you proposal if you insist the cache mapping is not acceptable to you and we can ask customer to verify again.

Thanks

Monk Liu | Cloud GPU & Virtualization | AMD







-----Original Message-----
From: Lazar, Lijo <Lijo.Lazar at amd.com>
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 7:26 PM
To: Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com>; Alex Deucher <alexdeucher at gmail.com>; Zhao, Victor <Victor.Zhao at amd.com>
Cc: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; Yang, Philip <Philip.Yang at amd.com>; Kuehling, Felix <Felix.Kuehling at amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdkfd: use cache GTT buffer for PQ and wb pool



On 11/8/2024 4:29 PM, Liu, Monk wrote:
> [AMD Official Use Only - AMD Internal Distribution Only]
>
> To be clear for the mb() approach: Even if we insert mb() in prior to amdgpu_ring_set_wptr(ring), GPU might still fetch stalled data from PQ due to USWC attributes.
>
Inserting an mb() doesn't cause WC buffer flush is a wrong assumption.

All prior loads/stores are supposed to be globally visible. Hence mb() followed by a write pointer update also should guarantee the same (From Arch manual).

        The MFENCE instruction establishes a memory fence for both loads and stores. The processor ensures that no load or store after MFENCE will become globally visible *until all loads and stores before MFENCE are globally visible.*


Ignoring the amdgpu driver part of it - if mb() is not working as expected as you claim that means something is wrong with the system.

USWC or WB for ring type may still be a separate discussion.

Thanks,
Lijo

> The issue here is not the re-ordering but the stalled PQ.
>
> Monk Liu | Cloud GPU & Virtualization | AMD
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liu, Monk
> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 6:22 PM
> To: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com>; Lazar, Lijo
> <Lijo.Lazar at amd.com>; Alex Deucher <alexdeucher at gmail.com>; Zhao,
> Victor <Victor.Zhao at amd.com>
> Cc: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; Yang, Philip <Philip.Yang at amd.com>;
> Kuehling, Felix <Felix.Kuehling at amd.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdkfd: use cache GTT buffer for PQ and
> wb pool
>
> Christian/Lijo
>
> We verified all approaches, and we know what works and not works, obviously the mb() doesn't work.
>
> The way of mb() between set wptr_polling and kicking off doorbell is theoretically correct, and I'm not object to do so... but this won't resolve the issue we hit.
> First of all, USWC will have some chance that the data is still in CPU's WC storage place and not flushed to the memory and even with MB() get rid of re-ordering GPU might still have a chance to read stalled data from ring buffer as long as it is mapped USWC.
>
> This is why only cache plus snoop memory can get rid of inconsistence issues.
>
> Besides, do you know what's the rational to keep all GFX KCQ cache+snoop but only HIQ/KIQ from KFD configured to USWC ?
>
> For performance concern that looks to me always the second priority compared to "correct" especially under the case HIQ contributes very little to ROCM performance when switching to cache mapping.
>
>
> Monk Liu | Cloud GPU & Virtualization | AMD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 7:57 PM
> To: Lazar, Lijo <Lijo.Lazar at amd.com>; Alex Deucher
> <alexdeucher at gmail.com>; Zhao, Victor <Victor.Zhao at amd.com>
> Cc: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; Yang,
> Philip <Philip.Yang at amd.com>; Kuehling, Felix <Felix.Kuehling at amd.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdkfd: use cache GTT buffer for PQ and
> wb pool
>
> Am 07.11.24 um 06:58 schrieb Lazar, Lijo:
>> On 11/6/2024 8:42 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 1:49 AM Victor Zhao <Victor.Zhao at amd.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Monk Liu <Monk.Liu at amd.com>
>>>>
>>>> As cache GTT buffer is snooped, this way the coherence between CPU
>>>> write and GPU fetch is guaranteed, but original code uses WC +
>>>> unsnooped for HIQ PQ(ring buffer) which introduces coherency issues:
>>>> MEC fetches a stall data from PQ and leads to MEC hang.
>>> Can you elaborate on this?  I can see CPU reads being slower because
>>> the memory is uncached, but the ring buffer is mostly writes anyway.
>>> IIRC, the driver uses USWC for most if not all of the other ring
>>> buffers managed by the kernel.  Why aren't those a problem?
>> We have this on other rings -
>>          mb();
>>          amdgpu_ring_set_wptr(ring);
>>
>> I think the solution should be to use barrier before write pointer
>> updates rather than relying on PCIe snooping.
>
> Yeah, completely agree as well. The barrier also takes care of preventing the compiler from re-ordering writes.
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lijo
>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Monk Liu <Monk.Liu at amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c | 2 +-
>>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
>>>> index 1f1d79ac5e6c..fb087a0ff5bc 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
>>>> @@ -779,7 +779,7 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev *kfd,
>>>>          if (amdgpu_amdkfd_alloc_gtt_mem(
>>>>                          kfd->adev, size, &kfd->gtt_mem,
>>>>                          &kfd->gtt_start_gpu_addr, &kfd->gtt_start_cpu_ptr,
>>>> -                       false, true)) {
>>>> +                       false, false)) {
>>>>                  dev_err(kfd_device, "Could not allocate %d bytes\n", size);
>>>>                  goto alloc_gtt_mem_failure;
>>>>          }
>>>> --
>>>> 2.34.1
>>>>
>