[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 15/15] drm/i915/guc: Split hw submission for replay after GPU reset
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Mon Nov 28 14:02:33 UTC 2016
On 25/11/2016 09:30, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Something I missed before sending off the partial series was that the
> non-scheduler guc reset path was broken (in the full series, this is
> pushed to the execlists reset handler). The issue is that after a reset,
> we have to refill the GuC workqueues, which we do by resubmitting the
> requests. However, if we already have submitted them, the fences within
> them have already been used and triggering them again is an error.
> Instead, just repopulate the guc workqueue.
>
> [ 115.858560] [IGT] gem_busy: starting subtest hang-render
> [ 135.839867] [drm] GPU HANG: ecode 9:0:0xe757fefe, in gem_busy [1716], reason: Hang on render ring, action: reset
> [ 135.839902] drm/i915: Resetting chip after gpu hang
> [ 135.839957] [drm] RC6 on
> [ 135.858351] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 135.858357] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 45 at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_sw_fence.c:108 i915_sw_fence_complete+0x25/0x30
> [ 135.858357] Modules linked in: rfcomm bnep binfmt_misc nls_iso8859_1 input_leds snd_hda_codec_hdmi snd_hda_codec_realtek snd_hda_codec_generic snd_hda_intel snd_hda_codec snd_hda_core btusb btrtl snd_hwdep snd_pcm 8250_dw snd_seq_midi hid_lenovo snd_seq_midi_event snd_rawmidi iwlwifi x86_pkg_temp_thermal coretemp snd_seq crct10dif_pclmul snd_seq_device hci_uart snd_timer crc32_pclmul ghash_clmulni_intel idma64 aesni_intel virt_dma btbcm snd btqca aes_x86_64 btintel lrw cfg80211 bluetooth gf128mul glue_helper ablk_helper cryptd soundcore intel_lpss_pci intel_pch_thermal intel_lpss_acpi intel_lpss acpi_als mfd_core kfifo_buf acpi_pad industrialio autofs4 hid_plantronics usbhid dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log sdhci_pci ahci sdhci libahci i2c_hid hid
> [ 135.858389] CPU: 2 PID: 45 Comm: kworker/2:1 Tainted: G W 4.9.0-rc4+ #238
> [ 135.858389] Hardware name: /NUC6i3SYB, BIOS SYSKLi35.86A.0024.2015.1027.2142 10/27/2015
> [ 135.858392] Workqueue: events_long i915_hangcheck_elapsed
> [ 135.858394] ffffc900001bf9b8 ffffffff812bb238 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> [ 135.858396] ffffc900001bf9f8 ffffffff8104f621 0000006c00000000 ffff8808296137f8
> [ 135.858398] 0000000000000a00 ffff8808457a0000 ffff880845764e60 ffff880845760000
> [ 135.858399] Call Trace:
> [ 135.858403] [<ffffffff812bb238>] dump_stack+0x4d/0x65
> [ 135.858405] [<ffffffff8104f621>] __warn+0xc1/0xe0
> [ 135.858406] [<ffffffff8104f748>] warn_slowpath_null+0x18/0x20
> [ 135.858408] [<ffffffff813f8c15>] i915_sw_fence_complete+0x25/0x30
> [ 135.858410] [<ffffffff813f8fad>] i915_sw_fence_commit+0xd/0x30
> [ 135.858412] [<ffffffff8142e591>] __i915_gem_request_submit+0xe1/0xf0
> [ 135.858413] [<ffffffff8142e5c8>] i915_gem_request_submit+0x28/0x40
> [ 135.858415] [<ffffffff814433e7>] i915_guc_submit+0x47/0x210
> [ 135.858417] [<ffffffff81443e98>] i915_guc_submission_enable+0x468/0x540
> [ 135.858419] [<ffffffff81442495>] intel_guc_setup+0x715/0x810
> [ 135.858421] [<ffffffff8142b6b4>] i915_gem_init_hw+0x114/0x2a0
> [ 135.858423] [<ffffffff813eeaa8>] i915_reset+0xe8/0x120
> [ 135.858424] [<ffffffff813f3937>] i915_reset_and_wakeup+0x157/0x180
> [ 135.858426] [<ffffffff813f79db>] i915_handle_error+0x1ab/0x230
> [ 135.858428] [<ffffffff812c760d>] ? scnprintf+0x4d/0x90
> [ 135.858430] [<ffffffff81435985>] i915_hangcheck_elapsed+0x275/0x3d0
> [ 135.858432] [<ffffffff810668cf>] process_one_work+0x12f/0x410
> [ 135.858433] [<ffffffff81066bf3>] worker_thread+0x43/0x4d0
> [ 135.858435] [<ffffffff81066bb0>] ? process_one_work+0x410/0x410
> [ 135.858436] [<ffffffff81066bb0>] ? process_one_work+0x410/0x410
> [ 135.858438] [<ffffffff8106bbb4>] kthread+0xd4/0xf0
> [ 135.858440] [<ffffffff8106bae0>] ? kthread_park+0x60/0x60
>
> v2: Only resubmit submitted requests
> v3: Don't forget the pending requests have reserved space.
>
> Fixes: d55ac5bf97c6 ("drm/i915: Defer transfer onto execution timeline to actual hw submission")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> index 00b5fa871644..e12ff881d38d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
> @@ -602,12 +602,9 @@ static int guc_ring_doorbell(struct i915_guc_client *gc)
> }
>
> /**
> - * i915_guc_submit() - Submit commands through GuC
> + * __i915_guc_submit() - Submit commands through GuC
> * @rq: request associated with the commands
> *
> - * Return: 0 on success, otherwise an errno.
> - * (Note: nonzero really shouldn't happen!)
> - *
> * The caller must have already called i915_guc_wq_reserve() above with
> * a result of 0 (success), guaranteeing that there is space in the work
> * queue for the new request, so enqueuing the item cannot fail.
> @@ -619,7 +616,7 @@ static int guc_ring_doorbell(struct i915_guc_client *gc)
> * The only error here arises if the doorbell hardware isn't functioning
> * as expected, which really shouln't happen.
> */
> -static void i915_guc_submit(struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq)
> +static void __i915_guc_submit(struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq)
> {
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = rq->i915;
> struct intel_engine_cs *engine = rq->engine;
> @@ -628,17 +625,6 @@ static void i915_guc_submit(struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq)
> struct i915_guc_client *client = guc->execbuf_client;
> int b_ret;
>
> - /* We keep the previous context alive until we retire the following
> - * request. This ensures that any the context object is still pinned
> - * for any residual writes the HW makes into it on the context switch
> - * into the next object following the breadcrumb. Otherwise, we may
> - * retire the context too early.
> - */
> - rq->previous_context = engine->last_context;
> - engine->last_context = rq->ctx;
> -
> - i915_gem_request_submit(rq);
> -
> spin_lock(&client->wq_lock);
> guc_wq_item_append(client, rq);
>
> @@ -658,6 +644,23 @@ static void i915_guc_submit(struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq)
> spin_unlock(&client->wq_lock);
> }
>
> +static void i915_guc_submit(struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq)
> +{
> + struct intel_engine_cs *engine = rq->engine;
> +
> + /* We keep the previous context alive until we retire the following
> + * request. This ensures that any the context object is still pinned
> + * for any residual writes the HW makes into it on the context switch
> + * into the next object following the breadcrumb. Otherwise, we may
> + * retire the context too early.
> + */
> + rq->previous_context = engine->last_context;
> + engine->last_context = rq->ctx;
> +
> + i915_gem_request_submit(rq);
> + __i915_guc_submit(rq);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Everything below here is concerned with setup & teardown, and is
> * therefore not part of the somewhat time-critical batch-submission
> @@ -1556,7 +1559,7 @@ int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> /* Replay the current set of previously submitted requests */
> list_for_each_entry(rq, &engine->timeline->requests, link) {
> client->wq_rsvd += sizeof(struct guc_wq_item);
> - i915_guc_submit(rq);
> + __i915_guc_submit(rq);
> }
> }
>
>
The only thing bothering me here is how this interacts with the common,
or "execlist" part of the reset.
Copying Mika in hope he can help here. :)
I see that i915_gem_reset_engine runs before this GuC wq refill and does
some magic with the requests on the engine->timeline->requests lists.
Would it be possible to somehow better integrate the two things?
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list