[PATCH 2/3] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v3
Christian König
deathsimple at vodafone.de
Mon Aug 18 08:12:07 PDT 2014
Am 18.08.2014 um 16:45 schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com>
> ---
> V1 had a nasty bug breaking gpu lockup recovery. The fix is not
> allowing radeon_fence_driver_check_lockup to take exclusive_lock,
> and kill it during lockup recovery instead.
> V2 used delayed work that ran during lockup recovery, but required
> read lock. I've fixed this by downgrading the write, and retrying if
> recovery fails.
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h | 2 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c | 115 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h
> index 1d806983ec7b..29504efe8971 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon.h
> @@ -355,6 +355,8 @@ struct radeon_fence_driver {
> uint64_t sync_seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS];
> atomic64_t last_seq;
> bool initialized;
> + struct delayed_work fence_check_work;
> + struct radeon_device *rdev;
Put the reference to the device as the first field in the structure.
> };
>
> struct radeon_fence {
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
> index 913787085dfa..94eca53d99f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
> @@ -125,16 +125,7 @@ int radeon_fence_emit(struct radeon_device *rdev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -/**
> - * radeon_fence_process - process a fence
> - *
> - * @rdev: radeon_device pointer
> - * @ring: ring index the fence is associated with
> - *
> - * Checks the current fence value and wakes the fence queue
> - * if the sequence number has increased (all asics).
> - */
> -void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
> +static bool __radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
Don't use "__" for internal radeon function names and especially don't
remove the function documentation.
> {
> uint64_t seq, last_seq, last_emitted;
> unsigned count_loop = 0;
> @@ -190,7 +181,53 @@ void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
> }
> } while (atomic64_xchg(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq, seq) > seq);
>
> - if (wake)
> + if (seq < last_emitted && !rdev->in_reset)
> + mod_delayed_work(system_power_efficient_wq,
> + &rdev->fence_drv[ring].fence_check_work,
> + RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT);
Am I wrong or do you queue the work only after radeon_fence_process is
called for the first time?
Might be a good idea to have an explicit queue_delayed_work in
radeon_fence_emit as well.
> +
> + return wake;
> +}
> +
> +static void radeon_fence_driver_check_lockup(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct radeon_fence_driver *fence_drv;
> + struct radeon_device *rdev;
> + unsigned long iring;
> +
> + fence_drv = container_of(work, struct radeon_fence_driver, fence_check_work.work);
> + rdev = fence_drv->rdev;
> + iring = fence_drv - &rdev->fence_drv[0];
> +
> + down_read(&rdev->exclusive_lock);
> + if (__radeon_fence_process(rdev, iring))
> + wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue);
> + else if (radeon_ring_is_lockup(rdev, iring, &rdev->ring[iring])) {
> + /* good news we believe it's a lockup */
> + dev_warn(rdev->dev, "GPU lockup (current fence id "
> + "0x%016llx last fence id 0x%016llx on ring %ld)\n",
> + (uint64_t)atomic64_read(&fence_drv->last_seq),
> + fence_drv->sync_seq[iring], iring);
> +
> + /* remember that we need an reset */
> + rdev->needs_reset = true;
> + wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue);
> + }
> + up_read(&rdev->exclusive_lock);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * radeon_fence_process - process a fence
> + *
> + * @rdev: radeon_device pointer
> + * @ring: ring index the fence is associated with
> + *
> + * Checks the current fence value and wakes the fence queue
> + * if the sequence number has increased (all asics).
> + */
> +void radeon_fence_process(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
> +{
> + if (__radeon_fence_process(rdev, ring))
> wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue);
> }
>
> @@ -302,9 +339,10 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
> {
> uint64_t last_seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS];
> bool signaled;
> - int i, r;
> + int i;
>
> while (!radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq)) {
> + long r;
>
> /* Save current sequence values, used to check for GPU lockups */
> for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
> @@ -319,11 +357,11 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
> if (intr) {
> r = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(rdev->fence_queue, (
> (signaled = radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq))
> - || rdev->needs_reset), RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT);
> + || rdev->needs_reset), MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
> } else {
> r = wait_event_timeout(rdev->fence_queue, (
> (signaled = radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq))
> - || rdev->needs_reset), RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT);
> + || rdev->needs_reset), MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
> }
>
> for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
> @@ -334,50 +372,11 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
> trace_radeon_fence_wait_end(rdev->ddev, i, target_seq[i]);
> }
>
> - if (unlikely(r < 0))
> + if (r < 0)
> return r;
>
> - if (unlikely(!signaled)) {
> - if (rdev->needs_reset)
> - return -EDEADLK;
> -
> - /* we were interrupted for some reason and fence
> - * isn't signaled yet, resume waiting */
> - if (r)
> - continue;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
> - if (!target_seq[i])
> - continue;
> -
> - if (last_seq[i] != atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[i].last_seq))
> - break;
> - }
> -
> - if (i != RADEON_NUM_RINGS)
> - continue;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
> - if (!target_seq[i])
> - continue;
> -
> - if (radeon_ring_is_lockup(rdev, i, &rdev->ring[i]))
> - break;
> - }
> -
> - if (i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS) {
> - /* good news we believe it's a lockup */
> - dev_warn(rdev->dev, "GPU lockup (waiting for "
> - "0x%016llx last fence id 0x%016llx on"
> - " ring %d)\n",
> - target_seq[i], last_seq[i], i);
> -
> - /* remember that we need an reset */
> - rdev->needs_reset = true;
> - wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue);
> - return -EDEADLK;
> - }
> - }
> + if (rdev->needs_reset)
> + return -EDEADLK;
> }
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -711,6 +710,9 @@ static void radeon_fence_driver_init_ring(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
> rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[i] = 0;
> atomic64_set(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq, 0);
> rdev->fence_drv[ring].initialized = false;
> + INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].fence_check_work,
> + radeon_fence_driver_check_lockup);
> + rdev->fence_drv[ring].rdev = rdev;
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -760,6 +762,7 @@ void radeon_fence_driver_fini(struct radeon_device *rdev)
> /* no need to trigger GPU reset as we are unloading */
> radeon_fence_driver_force_completion(rdev);
> }
> + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].fence_check_work);
> wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue);
> radeon_scratch_free(rdev, rdev->fence_drv[ring].scratch_reg);
> rdev->fence_drv[ring].initialized = false;
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list