[RFC 1/9] drm/xe: Error handling in xe_force_wake_get()

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 01:32:38AM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06-09-2024 00:59, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 10:53:18AM +0530, Himal Prasad Ghimiray wrote:
> > > If an acknowledgment timeout occurs for a domain awake request, put to
> > > sleep all domains awakened by the caller and decrease the reference
> > > count for all requested domains. This prevents xe_force_wake_get() from
> > > leaving an unhandled reference count in case of failure.
> > > While at it, add simple kernel-doc for xe_force_wake_get() and
> > > xe_force_wake_put() functions.
> > > 
> > > Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar at intel.com>
> > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > > Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
> > > Cc: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das at intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > >   1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> > > index b263fff15273..8aa8d9b41052 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_force_wake.c
> > > @@ -150,31 +150,73 @@ static int domain_sleep_wait(struct xe_gt *gt,
> > >   					 (ffs(tmp__) - 1))) && \
> > >   					 domain__->reg_ctl.addr)
> > > +/**
> > > + * xe_force_wake_get : Increase the domain refcount; if it was 0 initially, wake the domain
> > > + * @fw: struct xe_force_wake
> > > + * @domains: forcewake domains to get refcount on
> > > + *
> > > + * Increment refcount for the force-wake domain. If the domain is
> > > + * asleep, awaken it and wait for acknowledgment within the specified
> > > + * timeout. If a timeout occurs, decrement the refcount and put the
> > > + * caller awaken domains to sleep.
> > > + *
> > > + * Return: 0 on success or 1 on ack timeout from domains.
> > 
> > * Returns 0 for success, negative error code otherwise.
> 
> Hi Rodrigo,
> 
> Sure. Will fix in next version.
> 
> > 
> > > + */
> > >   int xe_force_wake_get(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> > >   		      enum xe_force_wake_domains domains)
> > >   {
> > >   	struct xe_gt *gt = fw->gt;
> > >   	struct xe_force_wake_domain *domain;
> > > -	enum xe_force_wake_domains tmp, woken = 0;
> > > +	enum xe_force_wake_domains tmp, awake_rqst = 0, awake_ack = 0;
> > >   	unsigned long flags;
> > >   	int ret = 0;
> > >   	spin_lock_irqsave(&fw->lock, flags);
> > >   	for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, domains, fw, tmp) {
> > >   		if (!domain->ref++) {
> > > -			woken |= BIT(domain->id);
> > > +			awake_rqst |= BIT(domain->id);
> > >   			domain_wake(gt, domain);
> > >   		}
> > >   	}
> > > -	for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, woken, fw, tmp) {
> > > -		ret |= domain_wake_wait(gt, domain);
> > 
> > now you suppress the mmio error code...
> > should be better to find a way to propagate that.
> 
> 
> AFAIU the only possible error code from domain_wake_wait is -ETIMEDOUT, was
> planning to assign same to ret below, which I missed in the RFC.
> 
> 
> > 
> > > +	for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, awake_rqst, fw, tmp) {
> > > +		if (domain_wake_wait(gt, domain) == 0)
> > > +			awake_ack |= BIT(domain->id);
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	ret = (awake_ack == awake_rqst) ? 0 : 1;
> > 
> > s/1/-EIO/ ?
> 
> How about -ETIMEDOUT ? Since this is same error which will be propogated in
> case of domain_wake_wait failure ?

hmm, I guess it makes more sense indeed.

> 
> > 
> > > +
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * If @domains is XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL and an acknowledgment times out
> > > +	 * for any domain, decrease the reference count and put the awake
> > > +	 * domains to sleep. For individual domains, just decrement the
> > > +	 * reference count.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (ret) {
> > > +		for_each_fw_domain_masked(domain, awake_rqst, fw, tmp) {
> > > +			if (!--domain->ref && (awake_ack & BIT(domain->id)))
> > > +				domain_sleep(gt, domain);
> > 
> > wonder if it would help to extract this in a separate function to be
> > used here and in the -put function.
> 
> Let me think around that.
> 
> > 
> > But more then that, I have a question here...
> > Do we really need to sleep other domains if we are not getting ack from certain domain?
> > Doesn't it generally means that we are busted anyway?
> 
> I have no strong opinion on this, main thing is refcount shouldn't be
> incremented.
> 
> > 
> > But also, if we really need to sleep, then perhaps shouldn't we also
> > call the sleep function even from the guys who didn't ack? perhaps the ack
> > timedout, but it really woke-up? how sure we are that this is not possible?
> 
> I didn't want to change the hw state by calling sleep for the "ack failed"
> domain, so if necessary, Debug tools (PythonSV) can help us pinpoint the
> exact failure state of the HW registers.
> 
> 
> > 
> > > +		}
> > > +		awake_ack = 0;
> > >   	}
> > > -	fw->awake_domains |= woken;
> > > +
> > > +	fw->awake_domains |= awake_ack;
> > >   	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fw->lock, flags);
> > >   	return ret;
> > >   }
> > > +/**
> > > + * xe_force_wake_put - Decrement the refcount and put domain to sleep if refcount becomes 0
> > > + * @fw: Pointer to the force wake structure
> > > + * @domains: forcewake domains to put reference
> > > + *
> > > + * This function reduces the reference counts for specified domains. If
> > > + * refcount for any of the specified domain reaches 0, it puts the domain to sleep
> > > + * and waits for acknowledgment for domain to sleep within specified timeout.
> > > + * Ensure this function is called only in case of successful xe_force_wake_get().
> > > + *
> > > + * Returns 0 in case of success or non-zero in case of timeout of ack
> > > + */
> > >   int xe_force_wake_put(struct xe_force_wake *fw,
> > >   		      enum xe_force_wake_domains domains)
> > >   {
> > > -- 
> > > 2.34.1
> > >