From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand@intel.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "drm/i915: Propagate errors on awaiting already signaled fences" Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:17:32 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <161547945293.13836.11463967700367944674@build.alporthouse.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <YEo+6uvS7d0hh6nz@phenom.ffwll.local> Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-03-11 16:01:46) > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 11:05:46AM -0600, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > This reverts commit 9e31c1fe45d555a948ff66f1f0e3fe1f83ca63f7. Ever > > since that commit, we've been having issues where a hang in one client > > can propagate to another. In particular, a hang in an app can propagate > > to the X server which causes the whole desktop to lock up. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand@intel.com> > > Reported-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@intel.com> > > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3080 > > Fixes: 9e31c1fe45d5 ("drm/i915: Propagate errors on awaiting already signaled fences") > > Yeah I suggested to just go with the revert, so I guess on my to give you > the explainer to be added to the commit message. If you took the patch this was copied from and only revert on the dma-resv, things do not break horribly. > Error propagation along fences sound like a good idea, but as your bug > shows, surprising consequences, since propagating errors across security > boundaries is not a good thing. > > What we do have is track the hangs on the ctx, and report information to > userspace using RESET_STATS. And by the fence, which is far more precise. > That's how arb_robustness works. Also, if my > understanding is still correct, the EIO from execbuf is when your context > is banned (because not recoverable or too many hangs). And in all these > cases it's up to userspace to figure out what is all impacted and should > be reported to the application, that's not on the kernel to guess and > automatically propagate. > > What's more, we're also building more features on top of ctx error > reporting with RESET_STATS ioctl: Encrypted buffers use the same, and the > userspace fence wait also relies on that mechanism. So it is the path > going forward for reporting gpu hangs and resets to userspace. That ioctl is not a solid basis, it never did quite work as expected and we kept realising the limitations of the information and the accuracy that it could report. > So all together that's why I think we should just bury this idea again as > not quite the direction we want to go to, hence why I think the revert is > the right option here. No, as shown by igt it's a critical issue that we have to judicially chose which errors to ignore. And it's not just the ability to subvert gen7 and gen9, it's the error tracking employed for preempting contexts among others. Hence go with the original patch to undo the propagation along dma-resv. -Chris _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand@intel.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] Revert "drm/i915: Propagate errors on awaiting already signaled fences" Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:17:32 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <161547945293.13836.11463967700367944674@build.alporthouse.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <YEo+6uvS7d0hh6nz@phenom.ffwll.local> Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-03-11 16:01:46) > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 11:05:46AM -0600, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > This reverts commit 9e31c1fe45d555a948ff66f1f0e3fe1f83ca63f7. Ever > > since that commit, we've been having issues where a hang in one client > > can propagate to another. In particular, a hang in an app can propagate > > to the X server which causes the whole desktop to lock up. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand@intel.com> > > Reported-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@intel.com> > > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3080 > > Fixes: 9e31c1fe45d5 ("drm/i915: Propagate errors on awaiting already signaled fences") > > Yeah I suggested to just go with the revert, so I guess on my to give you > the explainer to be added to the commit message. If you took the patch this was copied from and only revert on the dma-resv, things do not break horribly. > Error propagation along fences sound like a good idea, but as your bug > shows, surprising consequences, since propagating errors across security > boundaries is not a good thing. > > What we do have is track the hangs on the ctx, and report information to > userspace using RESET_STATS. And by the fence, which is far more precise. > That's how arb_robustness works. Also, if my > understanding is still correct, the EIO from execbuf is when your context > is banned (because not recoverable or too many hangs). And in all these > cases it's up to userspace to figure out what is all impacted and should > be reported to the application, that's not on the kernel to guess and > automatically propagate. > > What's more, we're also building more features on top of ctx error > reporting with RESET_STATS ioctl: Encrypted buffers use the same, and the > userspace fence wait also relies on that mechanism. So it is the path > going forward for reporting gpu hangs and resets to userspace. That ioctl is not a solid basis, it never did quite work as expected and we kept realising the limitations of the information and the accuracy that it could report. > So all together that's why I think we should just bury this idea again as > not quite the direction we want to go to, hence why I think the revert is > the right option here. No, as shown by igt it's a critical issue that we have to judicially chose which errors to ignore. And it's not just the ability to subvert gen7 and gen9, it's the error tracking employed for preempting contexts among others. Hence go with the original patch to undo the propagation along dma-resv. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-11 16:17 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-05 17:05 [PATCH] Revert "drm/i915: Propagate errors on awaiting already signaled fences" Jason Ekstrand 2021-03-05 17:05 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand 2021-03-05 17:21 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork 2021-03-05 17:49 ` [PATCH] " Chris Wilson 2021-03-05 17:49 ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson 2021-03-05 17:51 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork 2021-03-05 21:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork 2021-03-11 16:01 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter 2021-03-11 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter 2021-03-11 16:17 ` Chris Wilson [this message] 2021-03-11 16:17 ` Chris Wilson 2021-05-19 7:43 [PATCH 2/2] " Daniel Vetter 2021-05-19 10:15 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter 2021-05-19 15:06 ` Jason Ekstrand 2021-05-19 17:16 ` Daniel Vetter 2021-05-19 19:01 ` Jason Ekstrand
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=161547945293.13836.11463967700367944674@build.alporthouse.com \ --to=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \ --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \ --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \ --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \ --cc=jason.ekstrand@intel.com \ --cc=jason@jlekstrand.net \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.