[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 5/6] drm/i915/dp_link_training: Set all downstream MST ports to BAD before retrying
Gil Dekel
gildekel at chromium.org
Fri Sep 1 23:24:08 UTC 2023
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 5:13 PM Gil Dekel <gildekel at chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 2:55 PM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:50:20PM -0400, Gil Dekel wrote:
> > > Before sending a uevent to userspace in order to trigger a corrective
> > > modeset, we change the failing connector's link-status to BAD. However,
> > > the downstream MST branch ports are left in their original GOOD state.
> > >
> > > This patch utilizes the drm helper function
> > > drm_dp_set_mst_topology_link_status() to rectify this and set all
> > > downstream MST connectors' link-status to BAD before emitting the uevent
> > > to userspace.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Gil Dekel <gildekel at chromium.org>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
> > > index 42353b1ac487..e8b10f59e141 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
> > > @@ -5995,16 +5995,20 @@ static void intel_dp_modeset_retry_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
> > > struct intel_dp *intel_dp =
> > > container_of(work, typeof(*intel_dp), modeset_retry_work);
> > > struct drm_connector *connector = &intel_dp->attached_connector->base;
> > > - drm_dbg_kms(connector->dev, "[CONNECTOR:%d:%s]\n", connector->base.id,
> > > - connector->name);
> > >
> > > - /* Grab the locks before changing connector property*/
> > > - mutex_lock(&connector->dev->mode_config.mutex);
> > > - /* Set connector link status to BAD and send a Uevent to notify
> > > - * userspace to do a modeset.
> > > + /* Set the connector's (and possibly all its downstream MST ports') link
> > > + * status to BAD.
> > > */
> > > + mutex_lock(&connector->dev->mode_config.mutex);
> > > + drm_dbg_kms(connector->dev, "[CONNECTOR:%d:%s] link status %d -> %d\n",
> > > + connector->base.id, connector->name,
> > > + connector->state->link_status, DRM_MODE_LINK_STATUS_BAD);
> > > drm_connector_set_link_status_property(connector,
> > > DRM_MODE_LINK_STATUS_BAD);
> > > + if (intel_dp->is_mst) {
> > > + drm_dp_set_mst_topology_link_status(&intel_dp->mst_mgr,
> > > + DRM_MODE_LINK_STATUS_BAD);
> >
> > Something is weird with the locking here.
> > I noticed that on patch 3 this new function also gets the same
> > mutex_lock(&connector->dev->mode_config.mutex);
> >
> > Since you didn't reach the deadlock, I'm clearly missing something
> > on the flow. But regardless of what I could be missing, I believe
> > this is totally not future proof and we will for sure hit dead-lock
> > cases.
> >
> You are not wrong.
>
> Something must have been wrong in my workflow, as I was positive I
> tested the code with this lock, but I must remember wrong. I tried
> testing my current code and it immediately locked, as you expected.
> So thank you for catching this.
>
> Lyude's original patch didn't include drm_dp_set_mst_topology_link_status()
> as an exposed drm helper function, so when I adjusted it for this series, I
> decided to add locks similar to how her other function using
> drm_dp_set_mst_topology_link_status() did. However, I failed to use the
> right lock, which is:
> drm_modeset_lock(&connector->dev->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL);
> drm_modeset_unlock(&connector->dev->mode_config.connection_mutex);
> This is similar to how drm_connector_set_link_status_property() locks
> before writing to link_status.
>
> I made sure to test my code with the above locks, and it runs well. Here's
> an instrumented log excerpt for failing link-training with an MST hub
> (I hacked the driver to always fail non eDP connectors and print the
> raw pointer addresses of the drm_device and mutex right before locking):
> [ 43.466329] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* Link Training
> Unsuccessful via gildekel HACK - (not eDP)
> [ 43.594950] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* Link Training
> Unsuccessful via gildekel HACK - (not eDP)
> [ 43.594979] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* Link Training Unsuccessful
> [ 43.595023] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* [CONNECTOR:273:DP-3]:
> [ 43.595028] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> connector->dev=00000000d4850450
> [ 43.595033] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> connector->dev->mode_config.mutex=00000000aac3fe45
> [ 44.771091] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> [MST-CONNECTOR:300:DP-5]:
> [ 44.771108] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> connector->dev=000000003fb97435
> [ 44.771115] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> &connector->dev->mode_config.connection_mutex=000000009aece20e
> [ 44.771127] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> [MST-CONNECTOR:303:DP-6]:
> [ 44.771132] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> connector->dev=0000000075236b75
> [ 44.771137] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR*
> &connector->dev->mode_config.connection_mutex=000000009aece20e
>
> Also, I was under the assumption that all connectors in an MST topology
> should reference the same drm_device object, but it seems like that's
> not the case. Is my assumption wrong?
>
Sorry, please disregard. I was printing the pointers' address instead
of the value's address. Same drm_device is shared:
Link Training Unsuccessful via gildekel HACK - (not eDP)
Link Training Unsuccessful via gildekel HACK - (not eDP)
Link Training Unsuccessful
[CONNECTOR:273:DP-3]:
connector->dev=00000000b88b882c
connector->dev->mode_config.mutex=00000000d64b22db
[MST-CONNECTOR:297:DP-5]:
connector->dev=00000000b88b882c
&connector->dev->mode_config.connection_mutex=000000002d876227
[MST-CONNECTOR:301:DP-6]:
connector->dev=00000000b88b882c
&connector->dev->mode_config.connection_mutex=000000002d876227
Sorry for the noise.
> > > + }
> > > mutex_unlock(&connector->dev->mode_config.mutex);
> > > /* Send Hotplug uevent so userspace can reprobe */
> > > drm_kms_helper_connector_hotplug_event(connector);
> > > --
> > > Gil Dekel, Software Engineer, Google / ChromeOS Display and Graphics
>
>
> Thanks for your time and comments!
> --
> Best,
> Gil Dekel, Software Engineer, Google / ChromeOS Display and Graphics
--
Practice Makes Notable Improvements
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list