All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>,
	"Nayana, Venkata Ramana" <venkata.ramana.nayana@intel.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: Skip signaling a signaled request
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:17:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200713131738.21319-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200713131617.21175-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Preempt-to-busy introduces various fascinating complications in that the
requests may complete as we are unsubmitting them from HW. As they may
then signal after unsubmission, we may find ourselves having to cleanup
the signaling request from within the signaling callback. This causes us
to recurse onto the same i915_request.lock.

However, if the request is already signaled (as it will be before we
enter the signal callbacks), we know we can skip the signaling of that
request during submission, neatly evading the spinlock recursion.

unsubmit(ve.rq0) # timeslice expiration or other preemption
 -> virtual_submit_request(ve.rq0)
dma_fence_signal(ve.rq0) # request completed before preemption ack
 -> submit_notify(ve.rq1)
   -> virtual_submit_request(ve.rq1) # sees that we have completed ve.rq0
      -> __i915_request_submit(ve.rq0)

[  264.210142] BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#2, sample_multi_tr/2093
[  264.210150]  lock: 0xffff9efd6ac55080, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: sample_multi_tr/2093, .owner_cpu: 2
[  264.210155] CPU: 2 PID: 2093 Comm: sample_multi_tr Tainted: G     U
[  264.210158] Hardware name: Intel Corporation CoffeeLake Client Platform/CoffeeLake S UDIMM RVP, BIOS CNLSFWR1.R00.X212.B01.1909060036 09/06/2019
[  264.210160] Call Trace:
[  264.210167]  dump_stack+0x98/0xda
[  264.210174]  spin_dump.cold+0x24/0x3c
[  264.210178]  do_raw_spin_lock+0x9a/0xd0
[  264.210184]  _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x6a/0x70
[  264.210314]  __i915_request_submit+0x10a/0x3c0 [i915]
[  264.210415]  virtual_submit_request+0x9b/0x380 [i915]
[  264.210516]  submit_notify+0xaf/0x14c [i915]
[  264.210602]  __i915_sw_fence_complete+0x8a/0x230 [i915]
[  264.210692]  i915_sw_fence_complete+0x2d/0x40 [i915]
[  264.210762]  __dma_i915_sw_fence_wake+0x19/0x30 [i915]
[  264.210767]  dma_fence_signal_locked+0xb1/0x1c0
[  264.210772]  dma_fence_signal+0x29/0x50
[  264.210871]  i915_request_wait+0x5cb/0x830 [i915]
[  264.210876]  ? dma_resv_get_fences_rcu+0x294/0x5d0
[  264.210974]  i915_gem_object_wait_fence+0x2f/0x40 [i915]
[  264.211084]  i915_gem_object_wait+0xce/0x400 [i915]
[  264.211178]  i915_gem_wait_ioctl+0xff/0x290 [i915]

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Fixes: 22b7a426bbe1 ("drm/i915/execlists: Preempt-to-busy")
References: 6d06779e8672 ("drm/i915: Load balancing across a virtual engine")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Nayana, Venkata Ramana" <venkata.ramana.nayana@intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.4+
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
index 3bb7320249ae..9b74a1bea5db 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
@@ -560,9 +560,7 @@ bool __i915_request_submit(struct i915_request *request)
 	engine->serial++;
 	result = true;
 
-xfer:	/* We may be recursing from the signal callback of another i915 fence */
-	spin_lock_nested(&request->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
-
+xfer:
 	if (!test_and_set_bit(I915_FENCE_FLAG_ACTIVE, &request->fence.flags)) {
 		list_move_tail(&request->sched.link, &engine->active.requests);
 		clear_bit(I915_FENCE_FLAG_PQUEUE, &request->fence.flags);
@@ -570,12 +568,19 @@ bool __i915_request_submit(struct i915_request *request)
 	}
 	GEM_BUG_ON(!llist_empty(&request->execute_cb));
 
-	if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_ENABLE_SIGNAL_BIT, &request->fence.flags) &&
-	    !test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT, &request->fence.flags) &&
-	    !i915_request_enable_breadcrumb(request))
-		intel_engine_signal_breadcrumbs(engine);
+	/* We may be recursing from the signal callback of another i915 fence */
+	if (!i915_request_signaled(request)) {
+		spin_lock_nested(&request->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
+
+		if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_ENABLE_SIGNAL_BIT,
+			     &request->fence.flags) &&
+		    !test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,
+			      &request->fence.flags) &&
+		    !i915_request_enable_breadcrumb(request))
+			intel_engine_signal_breadcrumbs(engine);
 
-	spin_unlock(&request->lock);
+		spin_unlock(&request->lock);
+	}
 
 	return result;
 }
-- 
2.20.1


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: "Nayana, Venkata Ramana" <venkata.ramana.nayana@intel.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Skip signaling a signaled request
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:17:38 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200713131738.21319-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200713131617.21175-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Preempt-to-busy introduces various fascinating complications in that the
requests may complete as we are unsubmitting them from HW. As they may
then signal after unsubmission, we may find ourselves having to cleanup
the signaling request from within the signaling callback. This causes us
to recurse onto the same i915_request.lock.

However, if the request is already signaled (as it will be before we
enter the signal callbacks), we know we can skip the signaling of that
request during submission, neatly evading the spinlock recursion.

unsubmit(ve.rq0) # timeslice expiration or other preemption
 -> virtual_submit_request(ve.rq0)
dma_fence_signal(ve.rq0) # request completed before preemption ack
 -> submit_notify(ve.rq1)
   -> virtual_submit_request(ve.rq1) # sees that we have completed ve.rq0
      -> __i915_request_submit(ve.rq0)

[  264.210142] BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#2, sample_multi_tr/2093
[  264.210150]  lock: 0xffff9efd6ac55080, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: sample_multi_tr/2093, .owner_cpu: 2
[  264.210155] CPU: 2 PID: 2093 Comm: sample_multi_tr Tainted: G     U
[  264.210158] Hardware name: Intel Corporation CoffeeLake Client Platform/CoffeeLake S UDIMM RVP, BIOS CNLSFWR1.R00.X212.B01.1909060036 09/06/2019
[  264.210160] Call Trace:
[  264.210167]  dump_stack+0x98/0xda
[  264.210174]  spin_dump.cold+0x24/0x3c
[  264.210178]  do_raw_spin_lock+0x9a/0xd0
[  264.210184]  _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x6a/0x70
[  264.210314]  __i915_request_submit+0x10a/0x3c0 [i915]
[  264.210415]  virtual_submit_request+0x9b/0x380 [i915]
[  264.210516]  submit_notify+0xaf/0x14c [i915]
[  264.210602]  __i915_sw_fence_complete+0x8a/0x230 [i915]
[  264.210692]  i915_sw_fence_complete+0x2d/0x40 [i915]
[  264.210762]  __dma_i915_sw_fence_wake+0x19/0x30 [i915]
[  264.210767]  dma_fence_signal_locked+0xb1/0x1c0
[  264.210772]  dma_fence_signal+0x29/0x50
[  264.210871]  i915_request_wait+0x5cb/0x830 [i915]
[  264.210876]  ? dma_resv_get_fences_rcu+0x294/0x5d0
[  264.210974]  i915_gem_object_wait_fence+0x2f/0x40 [i915]
[  264.211084]  i915_gem_object_wait+0xce/0x400 [i915]
[  264.211178]  i915_gem_wait_ioctl+0xff/0x290 [i915]

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Fixes: 22b7a426bbe1 ("drm/i915/execlists: Preempt-to-busy")
References: 6d06779e8672 ("drm/i915: Load balancing across a virtual engine")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: "Nayana, Venkata Ramana" <venkata.ramana.nayana@intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.4+
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
index 3bb7320249ae..9b74a1bea5db 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
@@ -560,9 +560,7 @@ bool __i915_request_submit(struct i915_request *request)
 	engine->serial++;
 	result = true;
 
-xfer:	/* We may be recursing from the signal callback of another i915 fence */
-	spin_lock_nested(&request->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
-
+xfer:
 	if (!test_and_set_bit(I915_FENCE_FLAG_ACTIVE, &request->fence.flags)) {
 		list_move_tail(&request->sched.link, &engine->active.requests);
 		clear_bit(I915_FENCE_FLAG_PQUEUE, &request->fence.flags);
@@ -570,12 +568,19 @@ bool __i915_request_submit(struct i915_request *request)
 	}
 	GEM_BUG_ON(!llist_empty(&request->execute_cb));
 
-	if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_ENABLE_SIGNAL_BIT, &request->fence.flags) &&
-	    !test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT, &request->fence.flags) &&
-	    !i915_request_enable_breadcrumb(request))
-		intel_engine_signal_breadcrumbs(engine);
+	/* We may be recursing from the signal callback of another i915 fence */
+	if (!i915_request_signaled(request)) {
+		spin_lock_nested(&request->lock, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
+
+		if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_ENABLE_SIGNAL_BIT,
+			     &request->fence.flags) &&
+		    !test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,
+			      &request->fence.flags) &&
+		    !i915_request_enable_breadcrumb(request))
+			intel_engine_signal_breadcrumbs(engine);
 
-	spin_unlock(&request->lock);
+		spin_unlock(&request->lock);
+	}
 
 	return result;
 }
-- 
2.20.1

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-13 13:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-13 13:16 [PATCH] drm/i915: Skip signaling a signaled request Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 13:16 ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 13:17 ` Chris Wilson [this message]
2020-07-13 13:17   ` Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 13:28   ` Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 13:28     ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 13:26 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Skip signaling a signaled request (rev2) Patchwork
2020-07-13 13:39 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2020-07-13 14:16 ` [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Skip signaling a signaled request Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 14:16   ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2020-07-13 16:10   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-13 16:10     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-13 14:30 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Skip signaling a signaled request (rev3) Patchwork
2020-07-13 14:52 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2020-07-13 15:52 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200713131738.21319-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --to=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com \
    --cc=venkata.ramana.nayana@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.