[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/gtt: Defer the free for alloc error paths

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Matthew Auld (2019-07-04 11:28:18)
> On 03/07/2019 18:19, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > If we hit an error while allocating the page tables, we have to unwind
> > the incomplete updates, and wish to free the unused pd. However, we are
> > not allowed to be hoding the spinlock at that point, and so must use the
> 
> holding
> 
> > later free to defer it until after we drop the lock.
> > 
> > <3> [414.363795] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c:472
> > <3> [414.364167] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 3905, name: i915_selftest
> > <4> [414.364406] 3 locks held by i915_selftest/3905:
> > <4> [414.364408]  #0: 0000000034fe8aa8 (&dev->mutex){....}, at: device_driver_attach+0x18/0x50
> > <4> [414.364415]  #1: 000000006bd8a560 (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.}, at: igt_ctx_exec+0xb7/0x410 [i915]
> > <4> [414.364476]  #2: 000000003dfdc766 (&(&pd->lock)->rlock){+.+.}, at: gen8_ppgtt_alloc_pdp+0x448/0x540 [i915]
> > <3> [414.364529] Preemption disabled at:
> > <4> [414.364530] [<0000000000000000>] 0x0
> > <4> [414.364696] CPU: 0 PID: 3905 Comm: i915_selftest Tainted: G     U            5.2.0-rc7-CI-CI_DRM_6403+ #1
> > <4> [414.364698] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.10.1-0-g8891697-prebuilt.qemu-project.org 04/01/2014
> > <4> [414.364699] Call Trace:
> > <4> [414.364704]  dump_stack+0x67/0x9b
> > <4> [414.364708]  ___might_sleep+0x167/0x250
> > <4> [414.364777]  vm_free_page+0x24/0xc0 [i915]
> > <4> [414.364852]  free_pd+0xf/0x20 [i915]
> > <4> [414.364897]  gen8_ppgtt_alloc_pdp+0x489/0x540 [i915]
> > <4> [414.364946]  gen8_ppgtt_alloc_4lvl+0x8e/0x2e0 [i915]
> > <4> [414.364992]  ppgtt_bind_vma+0x2e/0x60 [i915]
> > <4> [414.365039]  i915_vma_bind+0xe8/0x2c0 [i915]
> > <4> [414.365088]  __i915_vma_do_pin+0xa1/0xd20 [i915]
> > 
> > Fixes: 1d1b5490b91c ("drm/i915/gtt: Replace struct_mutex serialisation for allocation")
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at intel.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 6 ++++--
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
> > index 9e76347e039e..1065753e86fb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
> > @@ -1489,7 +1489,8 @@ static int gen8_ppgtt_alloc_pdp(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> >               gen8_ppgtt_set_pdpe(pdp, vm->scratch_pd, pdpe);
> >               GEM_BUG_ON(!atomic_read(&pdp->used));
> >               atomic_dec(&pdp->used);
> > -             free_pd(vm, pd);
> > +             GEM_BUG_ON(alloc);
> 
> Pretty sure it's possible for alloc != NULL at this point...two threads, 
> one is late to the party, we are unlucky and hit the unwind_pd path. No?

Hmm. I was thinking we would only get here on an alloc failure path, but
yeah, the BUG_ON was a case for doubt.

Drat.
-Chris