* [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2018-07-05 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: DRI Development Cc: Intel Graphics Development, Daniel Vetter, Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, stable, Daniel Vetter When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when reconfiguring global resources). But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's knowledge For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got dropped. Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking commits. v2: Add comments and a WARN_ON to enforce this only when allowed - we don't want to silently convert page flips into blocking plane updates just because the driver is buggy. References: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-July/182281.html Bugzilla: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/issues/24#note_9568 Cc: Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> Cc: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c index d5cefb1cb2a2..058512f14772 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c @@ -2018,15 +2018,43 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_commit); int drm_atomic_nonblocking_commit(struct drm_atomic_state *state) { struct drm_mode_config *config = &state->dev->mode_config; - int ret; + unsigned requested_crtc = 0; + unsigned affected_crtc = 0; + struct drm_crtc *crtc; + struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state; + bool nonblocking = true; + int ret, i; + + /* + * For commits that allow modesets drivers can add other CRTCs to the + * atomic commit, e.g. when they need to reallocate global resources. + * + * But when userspace also requests a nonblocking commit then userspace + * cannot know that the commit affects other CRTCs, which can result in + * spurious EBUSY failures. Until we have better uapi plug this by + * demoting such commits to blocking mode. + */ + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) + requested_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc); ret = drm_atomic_check_only(state); if (ret) return ret; - DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("committing %p nonblocking\n", state); + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) + affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc); + + if (affected_crtc != requested_crtc) { + /* adding other CRTC is only allowed for modeset commits */ + WARN_ON(state->allow_modeset); + + DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("demoting %p to blocking mode to avoid EBUSY\n", state); + nonblocking = false; + } else { + DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("committing %p nonblocking\n", state); + } - return config->funcs->atomic_commit(state->dev, state, true); + return config->funcs->atomic_commit(state->dev, state, nonblocking); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_nonblocking_commit); -- 2.18.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2018-07-05 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: DRI Development Cc: Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development, stable, Pekka Paalanen, Daniel Vetter When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when reconfiguring global resources). But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's knowledge For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got dropped. Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking commits. v2: Add comments and a WARN_ON to enforce this only when allowed - we don't want to silently convert page flips into blocking plane updates just because the driver is buggy. References: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-July/182281.html Bugzilla: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/issues/24#note_9568 Cc: Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> Cc: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c index d5cefb1cb2a2..058512f14772 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c @@ -2018,15 +2018,43 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_commit); int drm_atomic_nonblocking_commit(struct drm_atomic_state *state) { struct drm_mode_config *config = &state->dev->mode_config; - int ret; + unsigned requested_crtc = 0; + unsigned affected_crtc = 0; + struct drm_crtc *crtc; + struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state; + bool nonblocking = true; + int ret, i; + + /* + * For commits that allow modesets drivers can add other CRTCs to the + * atomic commit, e.g. when they need to reallocate global resources. + * + * But when userspace also requests a nonblocking commit then userspace + * cannot know that the commit affects other CRTCs, which can result in + * spurious EBUSY failures. Until we have better uapi plug this by + * demoting such commits to blocking mode. + */ + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) + requested_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc); ret = drm_atomic_check_only(state); if (ret) return ret; - DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("committing %p nonblocking\n", state); + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) + affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc); + + if (affected_crtc != requested_crtc) { + /* adding other CRTC is only allowed for modeset commits */ + WARN_ON(state->allow_modeset); + + DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("demoting %p to blocking mode to avoid EBUSY\n", state); + nonblocking = false; + } else { + DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("committing %p nonblocking\n", state); + } - return config->funcs->atomic_commit(state->dev, state, true); + return config->funcs->atomic_commit(state->dev, state, nonblocking); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_nonblocking_commit); -- 2.18.0 _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter (?) @ 2018-07-05 10:21 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone -1 siblings, 1 reply; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2018-07-05 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: DRI Development Cc: Intel Graphics Development, Daniel Vetter, Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, stable, Daniel Vetter When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when reconfiguring global resources). But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's knowledge For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got dropped. Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking commits. v2: Add comments and a WARN_ON to enforce this only when allowed - we don't want to silently convert page flips into blocking plane updates just because the driver is buggy. v3: Fix inverted WARN_ON (Pekka). References: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-July/182281.html Bugzilla: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/issues/24#note_9568 Cc: Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> Cc: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.co.uk> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c index d5cefb1cb2a2..3c46a4ef7898 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c @@ -2018,15 +2018,43 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_commit); int drm_atomic_nonblocking_commit(struct drm_atomic_state *state) { struct drm_mode_config *config = &state->dev->mode_config; - int ret; + unsigned requested_crtc = 0; + unsigned affected_crtc = 0; + struct drm_crtc *crtc; + struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state; + bool nonblocking = true; + int ret, i; + + /* + * For commits that allow modesets drivers can add other CRTCs to the + * atomic commit, e.g. when they need to reallocate global resources. + * + * But when userspace also requests a nonblocking commit then userspace + * cannot know that the commit affects other CRTCs, which can result in + * spurious EBUSY failures. Until we have better uapi plug this by + * demoting such commits to blocking mode. + */ + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) + requested_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc); ret = drm_atomic_check_only(state); if (ret) return ret; - DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("committing %p nonblocking\n", state); + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) + affected_crtc |= drm_crtc_mask(crtc); + + if (affected_crtc != requested_crtc) { + /* adding other CRTC is only allowed for modeset commits */ + WARN_ON(!state->allow_modeset); + + DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("demoting %p to blocking mode to avoid EBUSY\n", state); + nonblocking = false; + } else { + DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("committing %p nonblocking\n", state); + } - return config->funcs->atomic_commit(state->dev, state, true); + return config->funcs->atomic_commit(state->dev, state, nonblocking); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_atomic_nonblocking_commit); -- 2.18.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2018-07-05 10:21 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone @ 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-01-31 7:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: DRI Development, Intel Graphics Development, Pekka Paalanen, stable, Daniel Vetter On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > reconfiguring global resources). > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > knowledge > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > dropped. > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > commits. Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some time later as well ... Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> Cheers, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-01-31 7:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > reconfiguring global resources). > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > knowledge > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > dropped. > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > commits. Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some time later as well ... Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-01-31 7:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > reconfiguring global resources). > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > knowledge > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > dropped. > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > commits. Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some time later as well ... Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone (?) @ 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-22 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Stone Cc: Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1944 bytes --] On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > knowledge > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > dropped. > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > commits. Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing the warning quite often. > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > time later as well ... > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > Cheers, > Daniel > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-22 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Stone Cc: Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Pekka Paalanen, Daniel Vetter [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1944 bytes --] On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > knowledge > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > dropped. > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > commits. Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing the warning quite often. > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > time later as well ... > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > Cheers, > Daniel > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-22 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Stone Cc: Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Pekka Paalanen, Daniel Vetter [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1944 bytes --] On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > knowledge > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > dropped. > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > commits. Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing the warning quite often. > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > time later as well ... > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > Cheers, > Daniel > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --] _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad (?) @ 2020-09-22 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-22 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad Cc: Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > knowledge > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > dropped. > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > commits. > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > the warning quite often. This would be a driver bug I think. That really shouldn't happen for normal page flips. -Daniel > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > time later as well ... > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-22 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > knowledge > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > dropped. > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > commits. > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > the warning quite often. This would be a driver bug I think. That really shouldn't happen for normal page flips. -Daniel > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > time later as well ... > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-22 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > knowledge > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > dropped. > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > commits. > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > the warning quite often. This would be a driver bug I think. That really shouldn't happen for normal page flips. -Daniel > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > time later as well ... > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-22 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter (?) @ 2020-09-22 14:14 ` Daniel Stone -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-09-22 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Marius Vlad, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 15:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. This really, really, really, bites. I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. Cheers, Daniel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 14:14 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-09-22 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Marius Vlad On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 15:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. This really, really, really, bites. I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 14:14 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-09-22 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Marius Vlad On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 15:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. This really, really, really, bites. I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-22 14:14 ` Daniel Stone (?) @ 2020-09-22 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-22 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Stone Cc: Marius Vlad, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 15:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. > > This really, really, really, bites. > > I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET > is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to > detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. > > I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the > clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. Ok so the hang-up last time around iirc was that I broke igt by making a few things more synchronous. Let's hope I'm not also breaking stuff with the WARN_ON ... New plan: - make this patch here only document existing behaviour and enforce it with the WARN_ON - new uapi would be behind a flag or something, with userspace and everything hanging off it. Thoughts? Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-22 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Stone Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Marius Vlad On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 15:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. > > This really, really, really, bites. > > I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET > is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to > detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. > > I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the > clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. Ok so the hang-up last time around iirc was that I broke igt by making a few things more synchronous. Let's hope I'm not also breaking stuff with the WARN_ON ... New plan: - make this patch here only document existing behaviour and enforce it with the WARN_ON - new uapi would be behind a flag or something, with userspace and everything hanging off it. Thoughts? Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-22 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Stone Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Marius Vlad On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 15:04, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > Defacto the uapi we have now is that userspace needs to ignore "spurious" EBUSY. > > This really, really, really, bites. > > I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET > is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to > detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. > > I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the > clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. Ok so the hang-up last time around iirc was that I broke igt by making a few things more synchronous. Let's hope I'm not also breaking stuff with the WARN_ON ... New plan: - make this patch here only document existing behaviour and enforce it with the WARN_ON - new uapi would be behind a flag or something, with userspace and everything hanging off it. Thoughts? Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-22 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter (?) @ 2020-09-22 19:02 ` Daniel Stone -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-09-22 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Marius Vlad, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter Hi, On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 17:02, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET > > is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to > > detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. > > > > I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the > > clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. > > Ok so the hang-up last time around iirc was that I broke igt by making > a few things more synchronous. Let's hope I'm not also breaking stuff > with the WARN_ON ... > > New plan: > - make this patch here only document existing behaviour and enforce it > with the WARN_ON > - new uapi would be behind a flag or something, with userspace and > everything hanging off it. > > Thoughts? What do you mean by 'new uapi'? The proposal that the kernel communicates back which object IDs have been added to the state behind your back? That it's been made automatically blocking? Something else? Cheers, Daniel (the other one) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 19:02 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-09-22 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Marius Vlad Hi, On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 17:02, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET > > is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to > > detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. > > > > I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the > > clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. > > Ok so the hang-up last time around iirc was that I broke igt by making > a few things more synchronous. Let's hope I'm not also breaking stuff > with the WARN_ON ... > > New plan: > - make this patch here only document existing behaviour and enforce it > with the WARN_ON > - new uapi would be behind a flag or something, with userspace and > everything hanging off it. > > Thoughts? What do you mean by 'new uapi'? The proposal that the kernel communicates back which object IDs have been added to the state behind your back? That it's been made automatically blocking? Something else? Cheers, Daniel (the other one) _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-22 19:02 ` Daniel Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Stone @ 2020-09-22 19:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen, Marius Vlad Hi, On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 17:02, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:14 PM Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > I think we need a guarantee that this never happens if ALLOW_MODESET > > is always used in blocking mode, plus in future a cap we can use to > > detect that we won't be getting spurious EBUSY events. > > > > I really don't want to ever paper over this, because it's one of the > > clearest indications that userspace has its timing/signalling wrong. > > Ok so the hang-up last time around iirc was that I broke igt by making > a few things more synchronous. Let's hope I'm not also breaking stuff > with the WARN_ON ... > > New plan: > - make this patch here only document existing behaviour and enforce it > with the WARN_ON > - new uapi would be behind a flag or something, with userspace and > everything hanging off it. > > Thoughts? What do you mean by 'new uapi'? The proposal that the kernel communicates back which object IDs have been added to the state behind your back? That it's been made automatically blocking? Something else? Cheers, Daniel (the other one) _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad (?) @ 2020-09-23 10:58 ` Daniel Vetter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-23 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad Cc: Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > knowledge > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > dropped. > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > commits. > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > the warning quite often. On which driver/chip does this happen? -Daniel > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > time later as well ... > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 10:58 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-23 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > knowledge > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > dropped. > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > commits. > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > the warning quite often. On which driver/chip does this happen? -Daniel > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > time later as well ... > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 10:58 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-23 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > knowledge > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > dropped. > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > commits. > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > the warning quite often. On which driver/chip does this happen? -Daniel > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > time later as well ... > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-23 10:58 ` Daniel Vetter (?) @ 2020-09-23 11:14 ` Marius Vlad -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-23 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2451 bytes --] On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > commits. > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > the warning quite often. > > On which driver/chip does this happen? I've tried it out on i915. > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 11:14 ` Marius Vlad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-23 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2451 bytes --] On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > commits. > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > the warning quite often. > > On which driver/chip does this happen? I've tried it out on i915. > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 11:14 ` Marius Vlad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-23 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2451 bytes --] On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > commits. > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > the warning quite often. > > On which driver/chip does this happen? I've tried it out on i915. > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --] _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-23 11:14 ` Marius Vlad (?) @ 2020-09-23 11:16 ` Daniel Vetter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-23 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad, Syrjala, Ville Cc: Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:14 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > > commits. > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > > the warning quite often. > > > > On which driver/chip does this happen? > I've tried it out on i915. lspci -nn please. Also adding Ville, who has an idea where this can all go wrong. The one he pointed out thus far is gen12+ only though. -Daniel > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Daniel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > -- > > Daniel Vetter > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 11:16 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-23 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad, Syrjala, Ville Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:14 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > > commits. > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > > the warning quite often. > > > > On which driver/chip does this happen? > I've tried it out on i915. lspci -nn please. Also adding Ville, who has an idea where this can all go wrong. The one he pointed out thus far is gen12+ only though. -Daniel > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Daniel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > -- > > Daniel Vetter > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 11:16 ` Daniel Vetter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Daniel Vetter @ 2020-09-23 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Marius Vlad, Syrjala, Ville Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:14 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > > commits. > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > > the warning quite often. > > > > On which driver/chip does this happen? > I've tried it out on i915. lspci -nn please. Also adding Ville, who has an idea where this can all go wrong. The one he pointed out thus far is gen12+ only though. -Daniel > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Daniel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > -- > > Daniel Vetter > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2020-09-23 11:16 ` Daniel Vetter (?) @ 2020-09-23 11:31 ` Marius Vlad -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-23 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Syrjala, Ville, Daniel Stone, Pekka Paalanen, Intel Graphics Development, stable, DRI Development, Daniel Vetter [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5278 bytes --] On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 01:16:42PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:14 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > > > commits. > > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > > > the warning quite often. > > > > > > On which driver/chip does this happen? > > I've tried it out on i915. > > lspci -nn please. Sure, $ lspci -nn 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v6/7th Gen Core Processor Host Bridge/DRAM Registers [8086:5914] (rev 08) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation UHD Graphics 620 [8086:5917] (rev 07) 00:04.0 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500 v5/6th Gen Core Processor Thermal Subsystem [8086:1903] (rev 08) 00:14.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP USB 3.0 xHCI Controller [8086:9d2f] (rev 21) 00:14.2 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Thermal subsystem [8086:9d31] (rev 21) 00:15.0 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Serial IO I2C Controller #0 [8086:9d60] (rev 21) 00:15.1 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Serial IO I2C Controller #1 [8086:9d61] (rev 21) 00:16.0 Communication controller [0780]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP CSME HECI #1 [8086:9d3a] (rev 21) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #1 [8086:9d10] (rev f1) 00:1c.2 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #3 [8086:9d12] (rev f1) 00:1c.4 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #5 [8086:9d14] (rev f1) 00:1d.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #9 [8086:9d18] (rev f1) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point LPC Controller/eSPI Controller [8086:9d4e] (rev 21) 00:1f.2 Memory controller [0580]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PMC [8086:9d21] (rev 21) 00:1f.3 Audio device [0403]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP HD Audio [8086:9d71] (rev 21) 00:1f.4 SMBus [0c05]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP SMBus [8086:9d23] (rev 21) 01:00.0 Unassigned class [ff00]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTS525A PCI Express Card Reader [10ec:525a] (rev 01) 02:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Qualcomm Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter [168c:003e] (rev 32) 6e:00.0 Non-Volatile memory controller [0108]: Toshiba Corporation Device [1179:0116] (it's a xps laptop) > > Also adding Ville, who has an idea where this can all go wrong. The > one he pointed out thus far is gen12+ only though. > -Daniel > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Daniel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Daniel Vetter > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 11:31 ` Marius Vlad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-23 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5278 bytes --] On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 01:16:42PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:14 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > > > commits. > > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > > > the warning quite often. > > > > > > On which driver/chip does this happen? > > I've tried it out on i915. > > lspci -nn please. Sure, $ lspci -nn 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v6/7th Gen Core Processor Host Bridge/DRAM Registers [8086:5914] (rev 08) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation UHD Graphics 620 [8086:5917] (rev 07) 00:04.0 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500 v5/6th Gen Core Processor Thermal Subsystem [8086:1903] (rev 08) 00:14.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP USB 3.0 xHCI Controller [8086:9d2f] (rev 21) 00:14.2 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Thermal subsystem [8086:9d31] (rev 21) 00:15.0 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Serial IO I2C Controller #0 [8086:9d60] (rev 21) 00:15.1 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Serial IO I2C Controller #1 [8086:9d61] (rev 21) 00:16.0 Communication controller [0780]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP CSME HECI #1 [8086:9d3a] (rev 21) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #1 [8086:9d10] (rev f1) 00:1c.2 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #3 [8086:9d12] (rev f1) 00:1c.4 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #5 [8086:9d14] (rev f1) 00:1d.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #9 [8086:9d18] (rev f1) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point LPC Controller/eSPI Controller [8086:9d4e] (rev 21) 00:1f.2 Memory controller [0580]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PMC [8086:9d21] (rev 21) 00:1f.3 Audio device [0403]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP HD Audio [8086:9d71] (rev 21) 00:1f.4 SMBus [0c05]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP SMBus [8086:9d23] (rev 21) 01:00.0 Unassigned class [ff00]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTS525A PCI Express Card Reader [10ec:525a] (rev 01) 02:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Qualcomm Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter [168c:003e] (rev 32) 6e:00.0 Non-Volatile memory controller [0108]: Toshiba Corporation Device [1179:0116] (it's a xps laptop) > > Also adding Ville, who has an idea where this can all go wrong. The > one he pointed out thus far is gen12+ only though. > -Daniel > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Daniel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Daniel Vetter > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets @ 2020-09-23 11:31 ` Marius Vlad 0 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Marius Vlad @ 2020-09-23 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development, DRI Development, stable, Daniel Vetter, Pekka Paalanen [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5278 bytes --] On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 01:16:42PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:14 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 12:58:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 3:36 PM Marius Vlad <marius.vlad@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:34:00AM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:21, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > > When doing an atomic modeset with ALLOW_MODESET drivers are allowed to > > > > > > pull in arbitrary other resources, including CRTCs (e.g. when > > > > > > reconfiguring global resources). > > > > > > > > > > > > But in nonblocking mode userspace has then no idea this happened, > > > > > > which can lead to spurious EBUSY calls, both: > > > > > > - when that other CRTC is currently busy doing a page_flip the > > > > > > ALLOW_MODESET commit can fail with an EBUSY > > > > > > - on the other CRTC a normal atomic flip can fail with EBUSY because > > > > > > of the additional commit inserted by the kernel without userspace's > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > For blocking commits this isn't a problem, because everyone else will > > > > > > just block until all the CRTC are reconfigured. Only thing userspace > > > > > > can notice is the dropped frames without any reason for why frames got > > > > > > dropped. > > > > > > > > > > > > Consensus is that we need new uapi to handle this properly, but no one > > > > > > has any idea what exactly the new uapi should look like. As a stop-gap > > > > > > plug this problem by demoting nonblocking commits which might cause > > > > > > issues by including CRTCs not in the original request to blocking > > > > > > commits. > > > > Gentle ping. I've tried out Linus's master tree and, and like Pekka, > > > > I've noticed this isn't integrated/added. > > > > > > > > Noticed this is fixing (also) DPMS when multiple outputs are in use. > > > > Wondering if we can just use a _ONCE() variant instead of WARN_ON(). I'm seeing > > > > the warning quite often. > > > > > > On which driver/chip does this happen? > > I've tried it out on i915. > > lspci -nn please. Sure, $ lspci -nn 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v6/7th Gen Core Processor Host Bridge/DRAM Registers [8086:5914] (rev 08) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation UHD Graphics 620 [8086:5917] (rev 07) 00:04.0 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500 v5/6th Gen Core Processor Thermal Subsystem [8086:1903] (rev 08) 00:14.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP USB 3.0 xHCI Controller [8086:9d2f] (rev 21) 00:14.2 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Thermal subsystem [8086:9d31] (rev 21) 00:15.0 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Serial IO I2C Controller #0 [8086:9d60] (rev 21) 00:15.1 Signal processing controller [1180]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP Serial IO I2C Controller #1 [8086:9d61] (rev 21) 00:16.0 Communication controller [0780]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP CSME HECI #1 [8086:9d3a] (rev 21) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #1 [8086:9d10] (rev f1) 00:1c.2 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #3 [8086:9d12] (rev f1) 00:1c.4 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #5 [8086:9d14] (rev f1) 00:1d.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PCI Express Root Port #9 [8086:9d18] (rev f1) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point LPC Controller/eSPI Controller [8086:9d4e] (rev 21) 00:1f.2 Memory controller [0580]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP PMC [8086:9d21] (rev 21) 00:1f.3 Audio device [0403]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP HD Audio [8086:9d71] (rev 21) 00:1f.4 SMBus [0c05]: Intel Corporation Sunrise Point-LP SMBus [8086:9d23] (rev 21) 01:00.0 Unassigned class [ff00]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTS525A PCI Express Card Reader [10ec:525a] (rev 01) 02:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Qualcomm Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter [168c:003e] (rev 32) 6e:00.0 Non-Volatile memory controller [0108]: Toshiba Corporation Device [1179:0116] (it's a xps laptop) > > Also adding Ville, who has an idea where this can all go wrong. The > one he pointed out thus far is gen12+ only though. > -Daniel > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up Daniel, and for reminding me about it some > > > > > time later as well ... > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com> > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Daniel > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Daniel Vetter > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --] _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter (?) (?) @ 2018-07-05 10:25 ` Patchwork -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Patchwork @ 2018-07-05 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx == Series Details == Series: drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/45968/ State : warning == Summary == $ dim checkpatch origin/drm-tip ae0e8aaf3ac4 drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets -:33: WARNING:COMMIT_LOG_LONG_LINE: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per line) #33: References: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-July/182281.html -:49: WARNING:UNSPECIFIED_INT: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned' #49: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c:2021: + unsigned requested_crtc = 0; -:50: WARNING:UNSPECIFIED_INT: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned' #50: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c:2022: + unsigned affected_crtc = 0; total: 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 checks, 46 lines checked _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter ` (2 preceding siblings ...) (?) @ 2018-07-05 10:41 ` Patchwork -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Patchwork @ 2018-07-05 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx == Series Details == Series: drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/45968/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4430 -> Patchwork_9534 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found. External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/45968/revisions/1/mbox/ == Known issues == Here are the changes found in Patchwork_9534 that come from known issues: === IGT changes === ==== Possible fixes ==== igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-c: fi-bxt-dsi: INCOMPLETE (fdo#103927) -> PASS fdo#103927 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103927 == Participating hosts (47 -> 41) == Missing (6): fi-ilk-m540 fi-hsw-4200u fi-byt-squawks fi-bsw-cyan fi-ctg-p8600 fi-skl-iommu == Build changes == * Linux: CI_DRM_4430 -> Patchwork_9534 CI_DRM_4430: 6b02112a5dacd9e464c08c6d54f762bafd24937f @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux IGT_4537: 5a160e9e1fe19c67e58e9c298303cb94c96aeb7d @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools Patchwork_9534: ae0e8aaf3ac4f64bb159033b7400bb9eeaefa7bf @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux == Linux commits == ae0e8aaf3ac4 drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets == Logs == For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_9534/issues.html _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter ` (3 preceding siblings ...) (?) @ 2018-07-05 10:45 ` Patchwork -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Patchwork @ 2018-07-05 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx == Series Details == Series: drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/45968/ State : warning == Summary == $ dim checkpatch origin/drm-tip 25d0f62b1aec drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets -:35: WARNING:COMMIT_LOG_LONG_LINE: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per line) #35: References: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-July/182281.html -:51: WARNING:UNSPECIFIED_INT: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned' #51: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c:2021: + unsigned requested_crtc = 0; -:52: WARNING:UNSPECIFIED_INT: Prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned' #52: FILE: drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c:2022: + unsigned affected_crtc = 0; total: 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 checks, 46 lines checked _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter ` (4 preceding siblings ...) (?) @ 2018-07-05 11:01 ` Patchwork -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Patchwork @ 2018-07-05 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx == Series Details == Series: drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/45968/ State : success == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4430 -> Patchwork_9535 = == Summary - SUCCESS == No regressions found. External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/45968/revisions/2/mbox/ == Known issues == Here are the changes found in Patchwork_9535 that come from known issues: === IGT changes === ==== Issues hit ==== igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank: fi-glk-dsi: PASS -> FAIL (fdo#100368) ==== Possible fixes ==== igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-c: fi-bxt-dsi: INCOMPLETE (fdo#103927) -> PASS fdo#100368 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100368 fdo#103927 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103927 == Participating hosts (47 -> 42) == Missing (5): fi-ctg-p8600 fi-ilk-m540 fi-byt-squawks fi-bsw-cyan fi-hsw-4200u == Build changes == * Linux: CI_DRM_4430 -> Patchwork_9535 CI_DRM_4430: 6b02112a5dacd9e464c08c6d54f762bafd24937f @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux IGT_4537: 5a160e9e1fe19c67e58e9c298303cb94c96aeb7d @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools Patchwork_9535: 25d0f62b1aec31059dce206cb9b821c58f7a0fc3 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux == Linux commits == 25d0f62b1aec drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets == Logs == For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_9535/issues.html _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter ` (5 preceding siblings ...) (?) @ 2018-07-05 12:23 ` Patchwork -1 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread From: Patchwork @ 2018-07-05 12:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx == Series Details == Series: drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/45968/ State : failure == Summary == = CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4430_full -> Patchwork_9535_full = == Summary - FAILURE == Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_9535_full absolutely need to be verified manually. If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes introduced in Patchwork_9535_full, please notify your bug team to allow them to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI. == Possible new issues == Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_9535_full: === IGT changes === ==== Possible regressions ==== igt@kms_busy@basic-modeset-a: shard-glk: PASS -> FAIL +3 igt@kms_cursor_legacy@long-nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic: shard-apl: PASS -> FAIL +4 shard-hsw: PASS -> FAIL +1 igt@kms_cursor_legacy@nonblocking-modeset-vs-cursor-atomic: shard-kbl: PASS -> FAIL +4 igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-to-x-tiled: shard-glk: NOTRUN -> FAIL ==== Warnings ==== igt@gem_exec_schedule@deep-bsd1: shard-kbl: SKIP -> PASS +1 igt@gem_exec_schedule@deep-vebox: shard-kbl: PASS -> SKIP == Known issues == Here are the changes found in Patchwork_9535_full that come from known issues: === IGT changes === ==== Issues hit ==== igt@gem_exec_schedule@pi-ringfull-bsd: shard-glk: NOTRUN -> FAIL (fdo#103158) +1 igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-to-y-tiled: shard-glk: NOTRUN -> FAIL (fdo#103822) igt@kms_setmode@basic: shard-glk: NOTRUN -> FAIL (fdo#99912) shard-kbl: PASS -> FAIL (fdo#99912) igt@perf_pmu@other-read-4: shard-snb: PASS -> INCOMPLETE (fdo#105411) ==== Possible fixes ==== igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-flip-atomic-transitions-varying-size: shard-hsw: FAIL (fdo#103355) -> PASS fdo#103158 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103158 fdo#103355 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103355 fdo#103822 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103822 fdo#105411 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105411 fdo#99912 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99912 == Participating hosts (5 -> 5) == No changes in participating hosts == Build changes == * Linux: CI_DRM_4430 -> Patchwork_9535 CI_DRM_4430: 6b02112a5dacd9e464c08c6d54f762bafd24937f @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux IGT_4537: 5a160e9e1fe19c67e58e9c298303cb94c96aeb7d @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools Patchwork_9535: 25d0f62b1aec31059dce206cb9b821c58f7a0fc3 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux piglit_4509: fdc5a4ca11124ab8413c7988896eec4c97336694 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/piglit == Logs == For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_9535/shards.html _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-09-23 11:32 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 38+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-07-05 10:10 [PATCH] drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets Daniel Vetter 2018-07-05 10:10 ` Daniel Vetter 2018-07-05 10:21 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone 2020-01-31 7:34 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Stone 2020-01-31 7:34 ` Daniel Stone 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad 2020-09-22 13:36 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marius Vlad 2020-09-22 13:36 ` Marius Vlad 2020-09-22 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-22 14:04 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter 2020-09-22 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-22 14:14 ` Daniel Stone 2020-09-22 14:14 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Stone 2020-09-22 14:14 ` Daniel Stone 2020-09-22 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-22 16:01 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter 2020-09-22 16:01 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-22 19:02 ` Daniel Stone 2020-09-22 19:02 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Stone 2020-09-22 19:02 ` Daniel Stone 2020-09-23 10:58 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-23 10:58 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter 2020-09-23 10:58 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-23 11:14 ` Marius Vlad 2020-09-23 11:14 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marius Vlad 2020-09-23 11:14 ` Marius Vlad 2020-09-23 11:16 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-23 11:16 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter 2020-09-23 11:16 ` Daniel Vetter 2020-09-23 11:31 ` Marius Vlad 2020-09-23 11:31 ` [Intel-gfx] " Marius Vlad 2020-09-23 11:31 ` Marius Vlad 2018-07-05 10:25 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork 2018-07-05 10:41 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork 2018-07-05 10:45 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm: avoid spurious EBUSY due to nonblocking atomic modesets (rev2) Patchwork 2018-07-05 11:01 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork 2018-07-05 12:23 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
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.