[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: do not capture error state on exiting context

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 27/09/2022 07:49, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> 
> 
> On 27.09.2022 01:34, Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 9/26/2022 3:44 PM, Andi Shyti wrote:
>>> Hi Andrzej,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 11:54:09PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>>>> Capturing error state is time consuming (up to 350ms on DG2), so it 
>>>> should
>>>> be avoided if possible. Context reset triggered by context removal is a
>>>> good example.
>>>> With this patch multiple igt tests will not timeout and should run 
>>>> faster.
>>>>
>>>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1551
>>>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3952
>>>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5891
>>>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6268
>>>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6281
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda at intel.com>
>>> fine for me:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti at linux.intel.com>
>>>
>>> Just to be on the safe side, can we also have the ack from any of
>>> the GuC folks? Daniele, John?
>>>
>>> Andi
>>>
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 3 ++-
>>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c 
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
>>>> index 22ba66e48a9b01..cb58029208afe1 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
>>>> @@ -4425,7 +4425,8 @@ static void guc_handle_context_reset(struct 
>>>> intel_guc *guc,
>>>>       trace_intel_context_reset(ce);
>>>>         if (likely(!intel_context_is_banned(ce))) {
>>>> -        capture_error_state(guc, ce);
>>>> +        if (!intel_context_is_exiting(ce))
>>>> +            capture_error_state(guc, ce);

I am not sure here - if we have a persistent context which caused a GPU 
hang I'd expect we'd still want error capture.

What causes the reset in the affected IGTs? Always preemption timeout?

>>>>           guc_context_replay(ce);
>>
>> You definitely don't want to replay requests of a context that is 
>> going away.
> 
> My intention was to just avoid error capture, but that's even better, 
> only condition change:
> -        if (likely(!intel_context_is_banned(ce))) {
> +       if (likely(intel_context_is_schedulable(ce)))  {

Yes that helper was intended to be used for contexts which should not be 
scheduled post exit or ban.

Daniele - you say there are some misses in the GuC backend. Should most, 
or even all in intel_guc_submission.c be converted to use 
intel_context_is_schedulable? My idea indeed was that "ban" should be a 
level up from the backends. Backend should only distinguish between 
"should I run this or not", and not the reason.

Regards,

Tvrtko

> 
>>
>> This seems at least in part due to 
>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/487531/, where we replaced the 
>> "context_ban" with "context_exiting". There are several places where 
>> we skipped operations if the context was banned (here included) which 
>> are now not covered anymore for exiting contexts. Maybe we need a new 
>> checker function to check both flags in places where we don't care why 
>> the context is being removed (ban vs exiting), just that it is?
>>
>> Daniele
>>
>>>>       } else {
>>>>           drm_info(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> 
> And maybe degrade above to drm_dbg, to avoid spamming dmesg?
> 
> Regards
> Andrzej
> 
> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.34.1
>>
>