<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_REOPENED " title="REOPENED - [CI][SHARDS] igt@perf_pmu@busy-idle-no-semaphores-bcs0 - dmesg-warn - WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111626#c28">Comment # 28</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_REOPENED " title="REOPENED - [CI][SHARDS] igt@perf_pmu@busy-idle-no-semaphores-bcs0 - dmesg-warn - WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111626">bug 111626</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk" title="Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>"> Chris Wilson</a> <pre>commit c9ad602feabe4271d2adf1bdae5d8b20c2dc84f1 Author: Chris Wilson <<a href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk">chris@chris-wilson.co.uk</a>> Date: Thu Nov 14 17:25:35 2019 +0000 drm/i915: Split i915_active.mutex into an irq-safe spinlock for the rbtree As we want to be able to run inside atomic context for retiring the i915_active, and we are no longer allowed to abuse mutex_trylock, split the tree management portion of i915_active.mutex into an irq-safe spinlock. References: a0855d24fc22d ("locking/mutex: Complain upon mutex API misuse in IRQ contexts") References: <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_REOPENED " title="REOPENED - [CI][SHARDS] igt@perf_pmu@busy-idle-no-semaphores-bcs0 - dmesg-warn - WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected" href="show_bug.cgi?id=111626">https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111626</a> Fixes: 274cbf20fd10 ("drm/i915: Push the i915_active.retire into a worker") Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <<a href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk">chris@chris-wilson.co.uk</a>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <<a href="mailto:tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com">tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com</a>> Cc: Matthew Auld <<a href="mailto:matthew.auld@intel.com">matthew.auld@intel.com</a>> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <<a href="mailto:tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com">tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com</a>> Link: <a href="https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191114172535.1116-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk">https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191114172535.1116-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk</a> will get rid of most of the culprits, but we still have the intel_engine_pm_put() from inside i915_pmu.c to worry about. I might just stop pushing for that to be immediate and always schedule the work.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>