[PATCH 10/10] drm/xe: Kill xe_device_mem_access_{get*,put}
Dixit, Ashutosh
ashutosh.dixit at intel.com
Sat Apr 27 01:30:44 UTC 2024
On Wed, 06 Mar 2024 16:15:54 -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>
Hi Rodrigo/Matt,
> @@ -409,14 +410,14 @@ static int __xe_ggtt_insert_bo_at(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt, struct xe_bo *bo,
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> - xe_device_mem_access_get(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
> + xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
> mutex_lock(&ggtt->lock);
> err = drm_mm_insert_node_in_range(&ggtt->mm, &bo->ggtt_node, bo->size,
> alignment, 0, start, end, 0);
> if (!err)
> xe_ggtt_map_bo(ggtt, bo);
> mutex_unlock(&ggtt->lock);
> - xe_device_mem_access_put(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
> + xe_pm_runtime_put(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
>
> return err;
> }
> @@ -434,7 +435,7 @@ int xe_ggtt_insert_bo(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt, struct xe_bo *bo)
>
> void xe_ggtt_remove_node(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt, struct drm_mm_node *node)
> {
> - xe_device_mem_access_get(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
> + xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
> mutex_lock(&ggtt->lock);
>
> xe_ggtt_clear(ggtt, node->start, node->size);
> @@ -444,7 +445,7 @@ void xe_ggtt_remove_node(struct xe_ggtt *ggtt, struct drm_mm_node *node)
> xe_ggtt_invalidate(ggtt);
>
> mutex_unlock(&ggtt->lock);
> - xe_device_mem_access_put(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
> + xe_pm_runtime_put(tile_to_xe(ggtt->tile));
Do __xe_ggtt_insert_bo_at and xe_ggtt_insert_bo need a runtime_pm reference
held?
In this series: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/121084/
I am not holding a runtime_pm reference when these functions are called and
it was fine with xe_device_mem_access_get/put (see
xe_oa_alloc_oa_buffer/xe_oa_free_oa_buffer if needed). But after changing
to xe_pm_runtime_get/put I now get this WARN:
[11614.356168] xe 0000:00:02.0: Missing outer runtime PM protection
[11614.356187] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 13075 at drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pm.c:549 xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume+0x60/0x80 [xe]
...
[11614.356377] Call Trace:
[11614.356379] <TASK>
[11614.356381] ? __warn+0x7e/0x180
[11614.356387] ? xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume+0x60/0x80 [xe]
[11614.356437] ? report_bug+0x1c7/0x1d0
[11614.356442] ? prb_read_valid+0x16/0x20
[11614.356447] ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x70
[11614.356451] ? exc_invalid_op+0x18/0x70
[11614.356453] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
[11614.356460] ? xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume+0x60/0x80 [xe]
[11614.356507] xe_ggtt_remove_node+0x22/0x80 [xe]
[11614.356546] xe_ttm_bo_destroy+0xea/0xf0 [xe]
[11614.356579] xe_oa_stream_destroy+0xf7/0x120 [xe]
[11614.356627] xe_oa_release+0x35/0xc0 [xe]
[11614.356673] __fput+0xa1/0x2d0
[11614.356679] __x64_sys_close+0x37/0x80
[11614.356697] do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x140
[11614.356700] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x71/0x79
[11614.356702] RIP: 0033:0x7f2b37314f67
Also, the WARN above happens only for 'free' but not for 'alloc' (so not
sure who gets the runtime_pm reference for 'alloc').
Holding the runtime_pm reference across alloc and free seems to be fine and
makes this WARN disappear. So maybe I should just do that? Just trying to
confirm.
Thanks.
--
Ashutosh
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list