[PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Christian König]

It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.

Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
@@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 					&args->handle);
 }
 
+
+/*
+ * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so that it can be
+ * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
+ */
+static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
+{
+	struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
+	struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
+	struct dma_fence_array *array;
+	unsigned int count;
+
+	if (!chain)
+		return 0;
+
+	count = 0;
+	dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
+		++count;
+
+	fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!fences)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	count = 0;
+	dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
+		fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
+
+	array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
+				       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
+				       1, false);
+	if (!array)
+		goto free_fences;
+
+	dma_fence_put(*f);
+	*f = &array->base;
+	return 0;
+
+free_fences:
+	while (count--)
+		dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
+
+	kfree(fences);
+	return -ENOMEM;
+}
+
 static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
 					    struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
 {
 	struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
-	struct dma_fence *fence;
 	struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
+	struct dma_fence *fence;
 	int ret;
 
 	timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, args->dst_handle);
@@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
 				     args->src_point, args->flags,
 				     &fence);
 	if (ret)
-		goto err;
+		goto err_put_timeline;
+
+	ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
+	if (ret)
+		goto err_free_fence;
+
 	chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
 	if (!chain) {
 		ret = -ENOMEM;
-		goto err1;
+		goto err_free_fence;
 	}
+
 	drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, args->dst_point);
-err1:
+err_free_fence:
 	dma_fence_put(fence);
-err:
+err_put_timeline:
 	drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
 
 	return ret;
-- 
2.25.1

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Christian König]

It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.

Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
@@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 					&args->handle);
 }
 
+
+/*
+ * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so that it can be
+ * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
+ */
+static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
+{
+	struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
+	struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
+	struct dma_fence_array *array;
+	unsigned int count;
+
+	if (!chain)
+		return 0;
+
+	count = 0;
+	dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
+		++count;
+
+	fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!fences)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	count = 0;
+	dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
+		fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
+
+	array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
+				       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
+				       1, false);
+	if (!array)
+		goto free_fences;
+
+	dma_fence_put(*f);
+	*f = &array->base;
+	return 0;
+
+free_fences:
+	while (count--)
+		dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
+
+	kfree(fences);
+	return -ENOMEM;
+}
+
 static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
 					    struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
 {
 	struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
-	struct dma_fence *fence;
 	struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
+	struct dma_fence *fence;
 	int ret;
 
 	timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, args->dst_handle);
@@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
 				     args->src_point, args->flags,
 				     &fence);
 	if (ret)
-		goto err;
+		goto err_put_timeline;
+
+	ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
+	if (ret)
+		goto err_free_fence;
+
 	chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
 	if (!chain) {
 		ret = -ENOMEM;
-		goto err1;
+		goto err_free_fence;
 	}
+
 	drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, args->dst_point);
-err1:
+err_free_fence:
 	dma_fence_put(fence);
-err:
+err_put_timeline:
 	drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
 
 	return ret;
-- 
2.25.1

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Patchwork]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 396 bytes --]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/100110/
State : failure

== Summary ==

Applying: drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
No changes -- Patch already applied.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 891 bytes --]

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
> It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
> the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> @@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>   					&args->handle);
>   }
>   
> +
> +/*
> + * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so that it can be
> + * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
> + */
> +static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
> +{
> +	struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
> +	struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
> +	struct dma_fence_array *array;
> +	unsigned int count;
> +
> +	if (!chain)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	count = 0;
> +	dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
> +		++count;
> +
> +	fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!fences)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	count = 0;
> +	dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
> +		fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
> +
> +	array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
> +				       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),


Hi Christian,


Sorry for the late answer to this.


It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added by 
"dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"

But the context allocation you added just above is breaking some tests. 
In particular igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point

That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and expects that 
we'll still on the previous points to complete.


In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number if there 
is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.

If the application wants to not depend on previous points for wait 
operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a new point.


Cheers,


-Lionel



> +				       1, false);
> +	if (!array)
> +		goto free_fences;
> +
> +	dma_fence_put(*f);
> +	*f = &array->base;
> +	return 0;
> +
> +free_fences:
> +	while (count--)
> +		dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
> +
> +	kfree(fences);
> +	return -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
>   static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
>   					    struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>   {
>   	struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
> -	struct dma_fence *fence;
>   	struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
> +	struct dma_fence *fence;
>   	int ret;
>   
>   	timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, args->dst_handle);
> @@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
>   				     args->src_point, args->flags,
>   				     &fence);
>   	if (ret)
> -		goto err;
> +		goto err_put_timeline;
> +
> +	ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto err_free_fence;
> +
>   	chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>   	if (!chain) {
>   		ret = -ENOMEM;
> -		goto err1;
> +		goto err_free_fence;
>   	}
> +
>   	drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, args->dst_point);
> -err1:
> +err_free_fence:
>   	dma_fence_put(fence);
> -err:
> +err_put_timeline:
>   	drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>   
>   	return ret;

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Christian König]

Am 25.05.22 um 08:47 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
> On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
>> It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
>> the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>> index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>> @@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct 
>> drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>                       &args->handle);
>>   }
>>   +
>> +/*
>> + * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so that 
>> it can be
>> + * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
>> + */
>> +static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
>> +{
>> +    struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
>> +    struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
>> +    struct dma_fence_array *array;
>> +    unsigned int count;
>> +
>> +    if (!chain)
>> +        return 0;
>> +
>> +    count = 0;
>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>> +        ++count;
>> +
>> +    fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +    if (!fences)
>> +        return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +    count = 0;
>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>> +        fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
>> +
>> +    array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
>> +                       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
>
>
> Hi Christian,
>
>
> Sorry for the late answer to this.
>
>
> It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added by 
> "dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"

Yes, correct. We are now enforcing some rules with warnings and this 
here bubbled up.

>
> But the context allocation you added just above is breaking some 
> tests. In particular igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>
> That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and expects 
> that we'll still on the previous points to complete.

Hui what? I don't understand the problem you are seeing here. What 
exactly is the test doing?

>
> In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number if 
> there is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.

Scratching my head what you mean with that. The functionality transfers 
a synchronization fence from one timeline to another.

So as far as I can see the new point should be part of the timeline of 
the syncobj we are transferring to.

> If the application wants to not depend on previous points for wait 
> operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a new point.

Well we should never lose synchronization. So what happens is that when 
we do the transfer all the fences of the source are flattened out into 
an array. And that array is then added as new point into the destination 
timeline.

Where exactly is the problem?

Regards,
Christian.

>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> -Lionel
>
>
>
>> +                       1, false);
>> +    if (!array)
>> +        goto free_fences;
>> +
>> +    dma_fence_put(*f);
>> +    *f = &array->base;
>> +    return 0;
>> +
>> +free_fences:
>> +    while (count--)
>> +        dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
>> +
>> +    kfree(fences);
>> +    return -ENOMEM;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file 
>> *file_private,
>>                           struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>>   {
>>       struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
>> -    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>       struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
>> +    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>       int ret;
>>         timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, 
>> args->dst_handle);
>> @@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int 
>> drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
>>                        args->src_point, args->flags,
>>                        &fence);
>>       if (ret)
>> -        goto err;
>> +        goto err_put_timeline;
>> +
>> +    ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
>> +    if (ret)
>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>> +
>>       chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>>       if (!chain) {
>>           ret = -ENOMEM;
>> -        goto err1;
>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>       }
>> +
>>       drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, 
>> args->dst_point);
>> -err1:
>> +err_free_fence:
>>       dma_fence_put(fence);
>> -err:
>> +err_put_timeline:
>>       drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>>         return ret;
>
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 25/05/2022 11:24, Christian König wrote:
> Am 25.05.22 um 08:47 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>> On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
>>> It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
>>> the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>   1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c 
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>> index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>> @@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct 
>>> drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>                       &args->handle);
>>>   }
>>>   +
>>> +/*
>>> + * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so that 
>>> it can be
>>> + * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
>>> + */
>>> +static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
>>> +    struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
>>> +    struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>> +    unsigned int count;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!chain)
>>> +        return 0;
>>> +
>>> +    count = 0;
>>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>> +        ++count;
>>> +
>>> +    fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> +    if (!fences)
>>> +        return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> +    count = 0;
>>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>> +        fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
>>> +
>>> +    array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
>>> +                       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
>>
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the late answer to this.
>>
>>
>> It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added by 
>> "dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"
>
> Yes, correct. We are now enforcing some rules with warnings and this 
> here bubbled up.
>
>>
>> But the context allocation you added just above is breaking some 
>> tests. In particular igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>
>> That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and expects 
>> that we'll still on the previous points to complete.
>
> Hui what? I don't understand the problem you are seeing here. What 
> exactly is the test doing?
>
>>
>> In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number if 
>> there is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.
>
> Scratching my head what you mean with that. The functionality 
> transfers a synchronization fence from one timeline to another.
>
> So as far as I can see the new point should be part of the timeline of 
> the syncobj we are transferring to.
>
>> If the application wants to not depend on previous points for wait 
>> operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a new point.
>
> Well we should never lose synchronization. So what happens is that 
> when we do the transfer all the fences of the source are flattened out 
> into an array. And that array is then added as new point into the 
> destination timeline.


In this case would be broken :


syncobjA <- signal point 1

syncobjA <- import syncobjB point 1 into syncobjA point 2

syncobjA <- query returns 0


-Lionel


>
> Where exactly is the problem?
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> -Lionel
>>
>>
>>
>>> +                       1, false);
>>> +    if (!array)
>>> +        goto free_fences;
>>> +
>>> +    dma_fence_put(*f);
>>> +    *f = &array->base;
>>> +    return 0;
>>> +
>>> +free_fences:
>>> +    while (count--)
>>> +        dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
>>> +
>>> +    kfree(fences);
>>> +    return -ENOMEM;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file 
>>> *file_private,
>>>                           struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>>>   {
>>>       struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
>>> -    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>       struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
>>> +    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>       int ret;
>>>         timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, 
>>> args->dst_handle);
>>> @@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int 
>>> drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
>>>                        args->src_point, args->flags,
>>>                        &fence);
>>>       if (ret)
>>> -        goto err;
>>> +        goto err_put_timeline;
>>> +
>>> +    ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
>>> +    if (ret)
>>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>> +
>>>       chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>>>       if (!chain) {
>>>           ret = -ENOMEM;
>>> -        goto err1;
>>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>>       }
>>> +
>>>       drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, 
>>> args->dst_point);
>>> -err1:
>>> +err_free_fence:
>>>       dma_fence_put(fence);
>>> -err:
>>> +err_put_timeline:
>>>       drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>>>         return ret;
>>
>>
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 25/05/2022 12:26, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
> On 25/05/2022 11:24, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 25.05.22 um 08:47 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>> On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
>>>> It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
>>>> the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>   1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c 
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>> index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>> @@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct 
>>>> drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>>                       &args->handle);
>>>>   }
>>>>   +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so that 
>>>> it can be
>>>> + * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
>>>> +    struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
>>>> +    struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>>> +    unsigned int count;
>>>> +
>>>> +    if (!chain)
>>>> +        return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +    count = 0;
>>>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>> +        ++count;
>>>> +
>>>> +    fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> +    if (!fences)
>>>> +        return -ENOMEM;
>>>> +
>>>> +    count = 0;
>>>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>> +        fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
>>>> +
>>>> +    array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
>>>> +                       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Christian,
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for the late answer to this.
>>>
>>>
>>> It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added by 
>>> "dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"
>>
>> Yes, correct. We are now enforcing some rules with warnings and this 
>> here bubbled up.
>>
>>>
>>> But the context allocation you added just above is breaking some 
>>> tests. In particular igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>>
>>> That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and expects 
>>> that we'll still on the previous points to complete.
>>
>> Hui what? I don't understand the problem you are seeing here. What 
>> exactly is the test doing?
>>
>>>
>>> In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number if 
>>> there is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.
>>
>> Scratching my head what you mean with that. The functionality 
>> transfers a synchronization fence from one timeline to another.
>>
>> So as far as I can see the new point should be part of the timeline 
>> of the syncobj we are transferring to.
>>
>>> If the application wants to not depend on previous points for wait 
>>> operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a new point.
>>
>> Well we should never lose synchronization. So what happens is that 
>> when we do the transfer all the fences of the source are flattened 
>> out into an array. And that array is then added as new point into the 
>> destination timeline.
>
>
> In this case would be broken :
>
>
> syncobjA <- signal point 1
>
> syncobjA <- import syncobjB point 1 into syncobjA point 2
>
> syncobjA <- query returns 0
>
>
> -Lionel


Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.

It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, but 
now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.


-Lionel


>
>
>>
>> Where exactly is the problem?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>
>>> -Lionel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> +                       1, false);
>>>> +    if (!array)
>>>> +        goto free_fences;
>>>> +
>>>> +    dma_fence_put(*f);
>>>> +    *f = &array->base;
>>>> +    return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +free_fences:
>>>> +    while (count--)
>>>> +        dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
>>>> +
>>>> +    kfree(fences);
>>>> +    return -ENOMEM;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>   static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file 
>>>> *file_private,
>>>>                           struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>>>>   {
>>>>       struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
>>>> -    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>       struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
>>>> +    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>       int ret;
>>>>         timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, 
>>>> args->dst_handle);
>>>> @@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int 
>>>> drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
>>>>                        args->src_point, args->flags,
>>>>                        &fence);
>>>>       if (ret)
>>>> -        goto err;
>>>> +        goto err_put_timeline;
>>>> +
>>>> +    ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
>>>> +    if (ret)
>>>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>>> +
>>>>       chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>>>>       if (!chain) {
>>>>           ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>> -        goto err1;
>>>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>       }
>>>> +
>>>>       drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, 
>>>> args->dst_point);
>>>> -err1:
>>>> +err_free_fence:
>>>>       dma_fence_put(fence);
>>>> -err:
>>>> +err_put_timeline:
>>>>       drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>>>>         return ret;
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Christian König]

Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
> On 25/05/2022 12:26, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
>> On 25/05/2022 11:24, Christian König wrote:
>>> Am 25.05.22 um 08:47 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>>> On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
>>>>> It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
>>>>> the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>   1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c 
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>> index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>> @@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct 
>>>>> drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>>>                       &args->handle);
>>>>>   }
>>>>>   +
>>>>> +/*
>>>>> + * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array so 
>>>>> that it can be
>>>>> + * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +    struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
>>>>> +    struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
>>>>> +    struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>>>> +    unsigned int count;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (!chain)
>>>>> +        return 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    count = 0;
>>>>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>>> +        ++count;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> +    if (!fences)
>>>>> +        return -ENOMEM;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    count = 0;
>>>>> +    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>>> +        fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
>>>>> +                       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Christian,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the late answer to this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added by 
>>>> "dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"
>>>
>>> Yes, correct. We are now enforcing some rules with warnings and this 
>>> here bubbled up.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But the context allocation you added just above is breaking some 
>>>> tests. In particular igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>>>
>>>> That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and expects 
>>>> that we'll still on the previous points to complete.
>>>
>>> Hui what? I don't understand the problem you are seeing here. What 
>>> exactly is the test doing?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number if 
>>>> there is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.
>>>
>>> Scratching my head what you mean with that. The functionality 
>>> transfers a synchronization fence from one timeline to another.
>>>
>>> So as far as I can see the new point should be part of the timeline 
>>> of the syncobj we are transferring to.
>>>
>>>> If the application wants to not depend on previous points for wait 
>>>> operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a new point.
>>>
>>> Well we should never lose synchronization. So what happens is that 
>>> when we do the transfer all the fences of the source are flattened 
>>> out into an array. And that array is then added as new point into 
>>> the destination timeline.
>>
>>
>> In this case would be broken :
>>
>>
>> syncobjA <- signal point 1
>>
>> syncobjA <- import syncobjB point 1 into syncobjA point 2
>>
>> syncobjA <- query returns 0
>>
>>
>> -Lionel
>
>
> Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>
> It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, but 
> now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.

Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.

What you describe above should still work fine.

Thanks for taking a look into this,
Christian.

>
>
> -Lionel
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Where exactly is the problem?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Lionel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> +                       1, false);
>>>>> +    if (!array)
>>>>> +        goto free_fences;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    dma_fence_put(*f);
>>>>> +    *f = &array->base;
>>>>> +    return 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +free_fences:
>>>>> +    while (count--)
>>>>> +        dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    kfree(fences);
>>>>> +    return -ENOMEM;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>>   static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file 
>>>>> *file_private,
>>>>>                           struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>>>>>   {
>>>>>       struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
>>>>> -    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>>       struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
>>>>> +    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>>       int ret;
>>>>>         timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, 
>>>>> args->dst_handle);
>>>>> @@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int 
>>>>> drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file *file_private,
>>>>>                        args->src_point, args->flags,
>>>>>                        &fence);
>>>>>       if (ret)
>>>>> -        goto err;
>>>>> +        goto err_put_timeline;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
>>>>> +    if (ret)
>>>>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>> +
>>>>>       chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>>>>>       if (!chain) {
>>>>>           ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>> -        goto err1;
>>>>> +        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>>       }
>>>>> +
>>>>>       drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, 
>>>>> args->dst_point);
>>>>> -err1:
>>>>> +err_free_fence:
>>>>>       dma_fence_put(fence);
>>>>> -err:
>>>>> +err_put_timeline:
>>>>>       drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>>>>>         return ret;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>On 25/05/2022 12:26, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
>>>On 25/05/2022 11:24, Christian König wrote:
>>>>Am 25.05.22 um 08:47 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>>>>On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
>>>>>>It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
>>>>>>the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 
>>>>>>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c 
>>>>>>b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>>>index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
>>>>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>>>@@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct 
>>>>>>drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>>>>                      &args->handle);
>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>  +
>>>>>>+/*
>>>>>>+ * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array 
>>>>>>so that it can be
>>>>>>+ * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
>>>>>>+ */
>>>>>>+static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
>>>>>>+{
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>>>>>+    unsigned int count;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    if (!chain)
>>>>>>+        return 0;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    count = 0;
>>>>>>+    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>>>>+        ++count;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>+    if (!fences)
>>>>>>+        return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    count = 0;
>>>>>>+    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>>>>+        fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
>>>>>>+                       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Christian,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Sorry for the late answer to this.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added 
>>>>>by "dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"
>>>>
>>>>Yes, correct. We are now enforcing some rules with warnings and 
>>>>this here bubbled up.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>But the context allocation you added just above is breaking 
>>>>>some tests. In particular 
>>>>>igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>>>>
>>>>>That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and 
>>>>>expects that we'll still on the previous points to complete.
>>>>
>>>>Hui what? I don't understand the problem you are seeing here. 
>>>>What exactly is the test doing?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number 
>>>>>if there is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.
>>>>
>>>>Scratching my head what you mean with that. The functionality 
>>>>transfers a synchronization fence from one timeline to another.
>>>>
>>>>So as far as I can see the new point should be part of the 
>>>>timeline of the syncobj we are transferring to.
>>>>
>>>>>If the application wants to not depend on previous points for 
>>>>>wait operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a 
>>>>>new point.
>>>>
>>>>Well we should never lose synchronization. So what happens is 
>>>>that when we do the transfer all the fences of the source are 
>>>>flattened out into an array. And that array is then added as new 
>>>>point into the destination timeline.
>>>
>>>
>>>In this case would be broken :
>>>
>>>
>>>syncobjA <- signal point 1
>>>
>>>syncobjA <- import syncobjB point 1 into syncobjA point 2
>>>
>>>syncobjA <- query returns 0
>>>
>>>
>>>-Lionel
>>
>>
>>Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>>
>>It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, 
>>but now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.
>
>Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.
>
>What you describe above should still work fine.
>
>Thanks for taking a look into this,
>Christian.

With some additional prints:

[  210.742634] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
[  210.742686] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: executing
[  210.756988] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: starting subtest transfer-timeline-point
[  210.757364] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* adding fence0 signaled=1
[  210.764543] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* resulting array fence signaled=0
[  210.800469] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=98
[  210.825426] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67


still learning this part of the code but AFAICS the problem is because
when we are creating the array, the 'signaled' doesn't propagate to the
array.

dma_fence_array_create() {
	...
	atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
	...
}

This is not considering the fact that some of the fences could already
have been signaled as is the case in the igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
test. See https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/shard-dg1-12/igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point.html

Quick patch on this function fixes it for me:

---------8<----------------
Subject: [PATCH] dma-buf: Honor already signaled fences on array creation

When creating an array, array->num_pending is marked with the number of
fences. However the fences could alredy have been signaled. Propagate
num_pending to the array by looking at each individual fence the array
contains.

Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
---
  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 11 ++++++++++-
  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
index 5c8a7084577b..32f491c32fa0 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
@@ -158,6 +158,8 @@ struct dma_fence_array *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
  {
  	struct dma_fence_array *array;
  	size_t size = sizeof(*array);
+	unsigned num_pending = 0;
+	struct dma_fence **f;
  
  	WARN_ON(!num_fences || !fences);
  
@@ -173,7 +175,14 @@ struct dma_fence_array *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
  	init_irq_work(&array->work, irq_dma_fence_array_work);
  
  	array->num_fences = num_fences;
-	atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
+
+	for (f = fences; f < fences + num_fences; f++)
+		num_pending += !dma_fence_is_signaled(*f);
+
+	if (signal_on_any)
+		num_pending = !!num_pending;
+
+	atomic_set(&array->num_pending, num_pending);
  	array->fences = fences;
  
  	array->base.error = PENDING_ERROR;
-- 
2.36.1
-----------------8<-------------------------

Not being too familiar with this code, I'm not sure about locking needed
here though. Would it be possible that while we are adding the fences
one of them is signaled and then array->num_pending gets out of sync
with the fences?

This fixes the result for me, but I still get the warning
WARN_ON(dma_fence_is_container(fences[num_fences])):

[ 1083.189164] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 1083.189169] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 6561 at drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c:202 dma_fence_array_create+0x155/0x1a0
[ 1083.189185] Modules linked in: i915 ttm drm_buddy drm_display_helper drm_kms_helper syscopyarea sysfillrect sysimgblt fb_sys_fops prime_numbers fuse x86_pkg_temp_thermal coretemp kvm_intel mei_hdcp kvm irqbypass mei_me mei crct10dif_pclmul crc32_pclmul e1000e ghash_clmulni_intel ptp i2c_i801 pps_core i2c_smbus intel_lpss_pci
[ 1083.189240] CPU: 2 PID: 6561 Comm: syncobj_timelin Not tainted 5.18.0-demarchi+ #4
[ 1083.189245] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Tiger Lake Client Platform/TBD, BIOS TGLSFWI1.R00.3024.A25.2004152248 04/15/2020
[ 1083.189247] RIP: 0010:dma_fence_array_create+0x155/0x1a0
[ 1083.189253] Code: ff 85 c9 75 10 eb 2a 48 81 fa a0 a6 0a 82 74 1a 83 e8 01 72 1c 48 63 d0 48 8b 54 d5 00 48 8b 52 08 48 81 fa 00 a7 0a 82 75 dd <0f> 0b 83 e8 01 73 e4 48 83 c4 08 4c 89 f0 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e
[ 1083.189256] RSP: 0018:ffffc900012b7d30 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 1083.189261] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff88810d1c2418 RCX: 0000000000000001
[ 1083.189264] RDX: ffffffff820aa700 RSI: ffffffff822d6807 RDI: ffffffff82330a7f
[ 1083.189266] RBP: ffff88810d1c2410 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000001
[ 1083.189268] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189271] R13: ffff88810d1c2418 R14: ffff88811d935100 R15: ffff88812feabbd8
[ 1083.189273] FS:  00007f715ea16540(0000) GS:ffff88888fd00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 1083.189276] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 1083.189279] CR2: 00007ffd80de7d20 CR3: 0000000130472001 CR4: 0000000000770ee0
[ 1083.189282] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189284] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 1083.189286] PKRU: 55555554
[ 1083.189288] Call Trace:
[ 1083.189290]  <TASK>
[ 1083.189297]  drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl+0x1bb/0x490
[ 1083.189307]  ? drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl+0x330/0x330
[ 1083.189314]  drm_ioctl_kernel+0xac/0x140
[ 1083.189324]  drm_ioctl+0x1fa/0x3d0
[ 1083.189329]  ? drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl+0x330/0x330
[ 1083.189347]  __x64_sys_ioctl+0x7d/0xa0
[ 1083.189358]  do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
[ 1083.189370]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 1083.189375] RIP: 0033:0x7f715f6b53ab
[ 1083.189379] Code: 0f 1e fa 48 8b 05 e5 7a 0d 00 64 c7 00 26 00 00 00 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff c3 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa b8 10 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d b5 7a 0d 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
[ 1083.189382] RSP: 002b:00007ffd80dea8f8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
[ 1083.189386] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffd80dea930 RCX: 00007f715f6b53ab
[ 1083.189389] RDX: 00007ffd80dea930 RSI: 00000000c02064cc RDI: 0000000000000003
[ 1083.189391] RBP: 00000000c02064cc R08: 0000000000000002 R09: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189393] R10: 00007f715f7fd20d R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007ffd80dea98c
[ 1083.189395] R13: 0000000000000003 R14: 0000000000000005 R15: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189409]  </TASK>
[ 1083.189412] irq event stamp: 24265
[ 1083.189414] hardirqs last  enabled at (24271): [<ffffffff8112ee82>] __up_console_sem+0x62/0x70
[ 1083.189421] hardirqs last disabled at (24276): [<ffffffff8112ee67>] __up_console_sem+0x47/0x70
[ 1083.189424] softirqs last  enabled at (20506): [<ffffffff810b93a2>] irq_exit_rcu+0xd2/0x130
[ 1083.189428] softirqs last disabled at (20501): [<ffffffff810b93a2>] irq_exit_rcu+0xd2/0x130
[ 1083.189431] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[ 1083.189768] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=0
[ 1083.191764] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67

Lucas De Marchi

>
>>
>>
>>-Lionel
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where exactly is the problem?
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Christian.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-Lionel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>+                       1, false);
>>>>>>+    if (!array)
>>>>>>+        goto free_fences;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    dma_fence_put(*f);
>>>>>>+    *f = &array->base;
>>>>>>+    return 0;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+free_fences:
>>>>>>+    while (count--)
>>>>>>+        dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    kfree(fences);
>>>>>>+    return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>+}
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>  static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct 
>>>>>>drm_file *file_private,
>>>>>>                          struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>>>>>>  {
>>>>>>      struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
>>>>>>-    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>>>      struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>>>      int ret;
>>>>>>        timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, 
>>>>>>args->dst_handle);
>>>>>>@@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int 
>>>>>>drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file 
>>>>>>*file_private,
>>>>>>                       args->src_point, args->flags,
>>>>>>                       &fence);
>>>>>>      if (ret)
>>>>>>-        goto err;
>>>>>>+        goto err_put_timeline;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
>>>>>>+    if (ret)
>>>>>>+        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>      chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>>>>>>      if (!chain) {
>>>>>>          ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>-        goto err1;
>>>>>>+        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>>>      }
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>      drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, 
>>>>>>args->dst_point);
>>>>>>-err1:
>>>>>>+err_free_fence:
>>>>>>      dma_fence_put(fence);
>>>>>>-err:
>>>>>>+err_put_timeline:
>>>>>>      drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>>>>>>        return ret;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>On 25/05/2022 12:26, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
>>>On 25/05/2022 11:24, Christian König wrote:
>>>>Am 25.05.22 um 08:47 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>>>>On 09/02/2022 20:26, Christian König wrote:
>>>>>>It is illegal to add a dma_fence_chain as timeline point. Flatten out
>>>>>>the fences into a dma_fence_array instead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>>>>>---
>>>>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 61 
>>>>>>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c 
>>>>>>b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>>>index c313a5b4549c..7e48dcd1bee4 100644
>>>>>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
>>>>>>@@ -853,12 +853,57 @@ drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl(struct 
>>>>>>drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>>>>>                      &args->handle);
>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>  +
>>>>>>+/*
>>>>>>+ * Try to flatten a dma_fence_chain into a dma_fence_array 
>>>>>>so that it can be
>>>>>>+ * added as timeline fence to a chain again.
>>>>>>+ */
>>>>>>+static int drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(struct dma_fence **f)
>>>>>>+{
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(*f);
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence *tmp, **fences;
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>>>>>+    unsigned int count;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    if (!chain)
>>>>>>+        return 0;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    count = 0;
>>>>>>+    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>>>>+        ++count;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    fences = kmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*fences), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>+    if (!fences)
>>>>>>+        return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    count = 0;
>>>>>>+    dma_fence_chain_for_each(tmp, &chain->base)
>>>>>>+        fences[count++] = dma_fence_get(tmp);
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    array = dma_fence_array_create(count, fences,
>>>>>>+                       dma_fence_context_alloc(1),
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Christian,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Sorry for the late answer to this.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It appears this commit is trying to remove the warnings added 
>>>>>by "dma-buf: Warn about dma_fence_chain container rules"
>>>>
>>>>Yes, correct. We are now enforcing some rules with warnings and 
>>>>this here bubbled up.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>But the context allocation you added just above is breaking 
>>>>>some tests. In particular 
>>>>>igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>>>>
>>>>>That test transfer points into the timeline at point 3 and 
>>>>>expects that we'll still on the previous points to complete.
>>>>
>>>>Hui what? I don't understand the problem you are seeing here. 
>>>>What exactly is the test doing?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>In my opinion we should be reusing the previous context number 
>>>>>if there is one and only allocate if we don't have a point.
>>>>
>>>>Scratching my head what you mean with that. The functionality 
>>>>transfers a synchronization fence from one timeline to another.
>>>>
>>>>So as far as I can see the new point should be part of the 
>>>>timeline of the syncobj we are transferring to.
>>>>
>>>>>If the application wants to not depend on previous points for 
>>>>>wait operations, it can reset the syncobj prior to adding a 
>>>>>new point.
>>>>
>>>>Well we should never lose synchronization. So what happens is 
>>>>that when we do the transfer all the fences of the source are 
>>>>flattened out into an array. And that array is then added as new 
>>>>point into the destination timeline.
>>>
>>>
>>>In this case would be broken :
>>>
>>>
>>>syncobjA <- signal point 1
>>>
>>>syncobjA <- import syncobjB point 1 into syncobjA point 2
>>>
>>>syncobjA <- query returns 0
>>>
>>>
>>>-Lionel
>>
>>
>>Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>>
>>It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, 
>>but now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.
>
>Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.
>
>What you describe above should still work fine.
>
>Thanks for taking a look into this,
>Christian.

With some additional prints:

[  210.742634] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
[  210.742686] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: executing
[  210.756988] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: starting subtest transfer-timeline-point
[  210.757364] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* adding fence0 signaled=1
[  210.764543] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* resulting array fence signaled=0
[  210.800469] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=98
[  210.825426] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67


still learning this part of the code but AFAICS the problem is because
when we are creating the array, the 'signaled' doesn't propagate to the
array.

dma_fence_array_create() {
	...
	atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
	...
}

This is not considering the fact that some of the fences could already
have been signaled as is the case in the igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
test. See https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/shard-dg1-12/igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point.html

Quick patch on this function fixes it for me:

---------8<----------------
Subject: [PATCH] dma-buf: Honor already signaled fences on array creation

When creating an array, array->num_pending is marked with the number of
fences. However the fences could alredy have been signaled. Propagate
num_pending to the array by looking at each individual fence the array
contains.

Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
---
  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 11 ++++++++++-
  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
index 5c8a7084577b..32f491c32fa0 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
@@ -158,6 +158,8 @@ struct dma_fence_array *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
  {
  	struct dma_fence_array *array;
  	size_t size = sizeof(*array);
+	unsigned num_pending = 0;
+	struct dma_fence **f;
  
  	WARN_ON(!num_fences || !fences);
  
@@ -173,7 +175,14 @@ struct dma_fence_array *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
  	init_irq_work(&array->work, irq_dma_fence_array_work);
  
  	array->num_fences = num_fences;
-	atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
+
+	for (f = fences; f < fences + num_fences; f++)
+		num_pending += !dma_fence_is_signaled(*f);
+
+	if (signal_on_any)
+		num_pending = !!num_pending;
+
+	atomic_set(&array->num_pending, num_pending);
  	array->fences = fences;
  
  	array->base.error = PENDING_ERROR;
-- 
2.36.1
-----------------8<-------------------------

Not being too familiar with this code, I'm not sure about locking needed
here though. Would it be possible that while we are adding the fences
one of them is signaled and then array->num_pending gets out of sync
with the fences?

This fixes the result for me, but I still get the warning
WARN_ON(dma_fence_is_container(fences[num_fences])):

[ 1083.189164] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 1083.189169] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 6561 at drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c:202 dma_fence_array_create+0x155/0x1a0
[ 1083.189185] Modules linked in: i915 ttm drm_buddy drm_display_helper drm_kms_helper syscopyarea sysfillrect sysimgblt fb_sys_fops prime_numbers fuse x86_pkg_temp_thermal coretemp kvm_intel mei_hdcp kvm irqbypass mei_me mei crct10dif_pclmul crc32_pclmul e1000e ghash_clmulni_intel ptp i2c_i801 pps_core i2c_smbus intel_lpss_pci
[ 1083.189240] CPU: 2 PID: 6561 Comm: syncobj_timelin Not tainted 5.18.0-demarchi+ #4
[ 1083.189245] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Tiger Lake Client Platform/TBD, BIOS TGLSFWI1.R00.3024.A25.2004152248 04/15/2020
[ 1083.189247] RIP: 0010:dma_fence_array_create+0x155/0x1a0
[ 1083.189253] Code: ff 85 c9 75 10 eb 2a 48 81 fa a0 a6 0a 82 74 1a 83 e8 01 72 1c 48 63 d0 48 8b 54 d5 00 48 8b 52 08 48 81 fa 00 a7 0a 82 75 dd <0f> 0b 83 e8 01 73 e4 48 83 c4 08 4c 89 f0 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e
[ 1083.189256] RSP: 0018:ffffc900012b7d30 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 1083.189261] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff88810d1c2418 RCX: 0000000000000001
[ 1083.189264] RDX: ffffffff820aa700 RSI: ffffffff822d6807 RDI: ffffffff82330a7f
[ 1083.189266] RBP: ffff88810d1c2410 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000001
[ 1083.189268] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189271] R13: ffff88810d1c2418 R14: ffff88811d935100 R15: ffff88812feabbd8
[ 1083.189273] FS:  00007f715ea16540(0000) GS:ffff88888fd00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 1083.189276] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 1083.189279] CR2: 00007ffd80de7d20 CR3: 0000000130472001 CR4: 0000000000770ee0
[ 1083.189282] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189284] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 1083.189286] PKRU: 55555554
[ 1083.189288] Call Trace:
[ 1083.189290]  <TASK>
[ 1083.189297]  drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl+0x1bb/0x490
[ 1083.189307]  ? drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl+0x330/0x330
[ 1083.189314]  drm_ioctl_kernel+0xac/0x140
[ 1083.189324]  drm_ioctl+0x1fa/0x3d0
[ 1083.189329]  ? drm_syncobj_fd_to_handle_ioctl+0x330/0x330
[ 1083.189347]  __x64_sys_ioctl+0x7d/0xa0
[ 1083.189358]  do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
[ 1083.189370]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 1083.189375] RIP: 0033:0x7f715f6b53ab
[ 1083.189379] Code: 0f 1e fa 48 8b 05 e5 7a 0d 00 64 c7 00 26 00 00 00 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff c3 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa b8 10 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d b5 7a 0d 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
[ 1083.189382] RSP: 002b:00007ffd80dea8f8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
[ 1083.189386] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffd80dea930 RCX: 00007f715f6b53ab
[ 1083.189389] RDX: 00007ffd80dea930 RSI: 00000000c02064cc RDI: 0000000000000003
[ 1083.189391] RBP: 00000000c02064cc R08: 0000000000000002 R09: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189393] R10: 00007f715f7fd20d R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007ffd80dea98c
[ 1083.189395] R13: 0000000000000003 R14: 0000000000000005 R15: 0000000000000000
[ 1083.189409]  </TASK>
[ 1083.189412] irq event stamp: 24265
[ 1083.189414] hardirqs last  enabled at (24271): [<ffffffff8112ee82>] __up_console_sem+0x62/0x70
[ 1083.189421] hardirqs last disabled at (24276): [<ffffffff8112ee67>] __up_console_sem+0x47/0x70
[ 1083.189424] softirqs last  enabled at (20506): [<ffffffff810b93a2>] irq_exit_rcu+0xd2/0x130
[ 1083.189428] softirqs last disabled at (20501): [<ffffffff810b93a2>] irq_exit_rcu+0xd2/0x130
[ 1083.189431] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[ 1083.189768] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=0
[ 1083.191764] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67

Lucas De Marchi

>
>>
>>
>>-Lionel
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Where exactly is the problem?
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Christian.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-Lionel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>+                       1, false);
>>>>>>+    if (!array)
>>>>>>+        goto free_fences;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    dma_fence_put(*f);
>>>>>>+    *f = &array->base;
>>>>>>+    return 0;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+free_fences:
>>>>>>+    while (count--)
>>>>>>+        dma_fence_put(fences[count]);
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    kfree(fences);
>>>>>>+    return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>+}
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>  static int drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct 
>>>>>>drm_file *file_private,
>>>>>>                          struct drm_syncobj_transfer *args)
>>>>>>  {
>>>>>>      struct drm_syncobj *timeline_syncobj = NULL;
>>>>>>-    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>>>      struct dma_fence_chain *chain;
>>>>>>+    struct dma_fence *fence;
>>>>>>      int ret;
>>>>>>        timeline_syncobj = drm_syncobj_find(file_private, 
>>>>>>args->dst_handle);
>>>>>>@@ -869,16 +914,22 @@ static int 
>>>>>>drm_syncobj_transfer_to_timeline(struct drm_file 
>>>>>>*file_private,
>>>>>>                       args->src_point, args->flags,
>>>>>>                       &fence);
>>>>>>      if (ret)
>>>>>>-        goto err;
>>>>>>+        goto err_put_timeline;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>+    ret = drm_syncobj_flatten_chain(&fence);
>>>>>>+    if (ret)
>>>>>>+        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>      chain = dma_fence_chain_alloc();
>>>>>>      if (!chain) {
>>>>>>          ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>-        goto err1;
>>>>>>+        goto err_free_fence;
>>>>>>      }
>>>>>>+
>>>>>>      drm_syncobj_add_point(timeline_syncobj, chain, fence, 
>>>>>>args->dst_point);
>>>>>>-err1:
>>>>>>+err_free_fence:
>>>>>>      dma_fence_put(fence);
>>>>>>-err:
>>>>>>+err_put_timeline:
>>>>>>      drm_syncobj_put(timeline_syncobj);
>>>>>>        return ret;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer (rev2)

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer (rev2)
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/100110/
State : failure

== Summary ==

Error: patch https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/100110/revisions/2/mbox/ not applied
Applying: drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer
error: patch failed: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c:158
error: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c: patch does not apply
error: Did you hand edit your patch?
It does not apply to blobs recorded in its index.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
Patch failed at 0001 drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Christian König]

Am 25.05.22 um 23:59 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:
> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>> [SNIP]
>>>
>>> Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>>>
>>> It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, 
>>> but now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.
>>
>> Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.
>>
>> What you describe above should still work fine.
>>
>> Thanks for taking a look into this,
>> Christian.
>
> With some additional prints:
>
> [  210.742634] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
> [  210.742686] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: executing
> [  210.756988] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: starting subtest 
> transfer-timeline-point
> [  210.757364] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* adding fence0 
> signaled=1
> [  210.764543] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* resulting 
> array fence signaled=0
> [  210.800469] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=98
> [  210.825426] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67
>
>
> still learning this part of the code but AFAICS the problem is because
> when we are creating the array, the 'signaled' doesn't propagate to the
> array.

Yeah, but that is intentionally. The array should only signal when 
requested.

I still don't get what the test case here is checking.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> dma_fence_array_create() {
>     ...
>     atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>     ...
> }
>
> This is not considering the fact that some of the fences could already
> have been signaled as is the case in the 
> igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
> test. See 
> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/shard-dg1-12/igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point.html
>
> Quick patch on this function fixes it for me:
>
> ---------8<----------------
> Subject: [PATCH] dma-buf: Honor already signaled fences on array creation
>
> When creating an array, array->num_pending is marked with the number of
> fences. However the fences could alredy have been signaled. Propagate
> num_pending to the array by looking at each individual fence the array
> contains.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c 
> b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
> index 5c8a7084577b..32f491c32fa0 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
> @@ -158,6 +158,8 @@ struct dma_fence_array *dma_fence_array_create(int 
> num_fences,
>  {
>      struct dma_fence_array *array;
>      size_t size = sizeof(*array);
> +    unsigned num_pending = 0;
> +    struct dma_fence **f;
>
>      WARN_ON(!num_fences || !fences);
>
> @@ -173,7 +175,14 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>      init_irq_work(&array->work, irq_dma_fence_array_work);
>
>      array->num_fences = num_fences;
> -    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
> +
> +    for (f = fences; f < fences + num_fences; f++)
> +        num_pending += !dma_fence_is_signaled(*f);
> +
> +    if (signal_on_any)
> +        num_pending = !!num_pending;
> +
> +    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, num_pending);
>      array->fences = fences;
>
>      array->base.error = PENDING_ERROR;

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 30/05/2022 12:52, Christian König wrote:
> Am 25.05.22 um 23:59 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:
>> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>>> Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>
>>>> Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>>>>
>>>> It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, 
>>>> but now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.
>>>
>>> Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.
>>>
>>> What you describe above should still work fine.
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking a look into this,
>>> Christian.
>>
>> With some additional prints:
>>
>> [  210.742634] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
>> [  210.742686] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: executing
>> [  210.756988] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: starting subtest 
>> transfer-timeline-point
>> [  210.757364] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* adding fence0 
>> signaled=1
>> [  210.764543] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* resulting 
>> array fence signaled=0
>> [  210.800469] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=98
>> [  210.825426] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67
>>
>>
>> still learning this part of the code but AFAICS the problem is because
>> when we are creating the array, the 'signaled' doesn't propagate to the
>> array.
>
> Yeah, but that is intentionally. The array should only signal when 
> requested.
>
> I still don't get what the test case here is checking.


There must be something I don't know about fence arrays.

You seem to say that creating an array of signaled fences will not make 
the array signaled.


This is the situation with this IGT test.

We started with a syncobj with point 1 & 2 signaled.

We take point 2 and import it as a new point 3 on the same syncobj.

We expect point 3 to be signaled as well and it's not.


Thanks,


-Lionel


>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>>
>> dma_fence_array_create() {
>>     ...
>>     atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>>     ...
>> }
>>
>> This is not considering the fact that some of the fences could already
>> have been signaled as is the case in the 
>> igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>> test. See 
>> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/shard-dg1-12/igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point.html
>>
>> Quick patch on this function fixes it for me:
>>
>> ---------8<----------------
>> Subject: [PATCH] dma-buf: Honor already signaled fences on array 
>> creation
>>
>> When creating an array, array->num_pending is marked with the number of
>> fences. However the fences could alredy have been signaled. Propagate
>> num_pending to the array by looking at each individual fence the array
>> contains.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c 
>> b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>> index 5c8a7084577b..32f491c32fa0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>> @@ -158,6 +158,8 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
>> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>>  {
>>      struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>      size_t size = sizeof(*array);
>> +    unsigned num_pending = 0;
>> +    struct dma_fence **f;
>>
>>      WARN_ON(!num_fences || !fences);
>>
>> @@ -173,7 +175,14 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
>> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>>      init_irq_work(&array->work, irq_dma_fence_array_work);
>>
>>      array->num_fences = num_fences;
>> -    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>> +
>> +    for (f = fences; f < fences + num_fences; f++)
>> +        num_pending += !dma_fence_is_signaled(*f);
>> +
>> +    if (signal_on_any)
>> +        num_pending = !!num_pending;
>> +
>> +    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, num_pending);
>>      array->fences = fences;
>>
>>      array->base.error = PENDING_ERROR;
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Christian König]

Am 30.05.22 um 12:09 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
> On 30/05/2022 12:52, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 25.05.22 um 23:59 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>
>>>>> Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this patch, 
>>>>> but now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.
>>>>
>>>> What you describe above should still work fine.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for taking a look into this,
>>>> Christian.
>>>
>>> With some additional prints:
>>>
>>> [  210.742634] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
>>> [  210.742686] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: executing
>>> [  210.756988] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: starting subtest 
>>> transfer-timeline-point
>>> [  210.757364] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* adding 
>>> fence0 signaled=1
>>> [  210.764543] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* resulting 
>>> array fence signaled=0
>>> [  210.800469] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=98
>>> [  210.825426] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67
>>>
>>>
>>> still learning this part of the code but AFAICS the problem is because
>>> when we are creating the array, the 'signaled' doesn't propagate to the
>>> array.
>>
>> Yeah, but that is intentionally. The array should only signal when 
>> requested.
>>
>> I still don't get what the test case here is checking.
>
>
> There must be something I don't know about fence arrays.
>
> You seem to say that creating an array of signaled fences will not 
> make the array signaled.

Exactly that, yes. The array delays it's signaling until somebody asks 
for it.

In other words the fences inside the array are check only after someone 
calls dma_fence_enable_sw_signaling() which in turn calls 
dma_fence_array_enable_signaling().

It is certainly possible that nobody does that in the drm_syncobj and 
because of this the array never signals.

Regards,
Christian.

>
>
> This is the situation with this IGT test.
>
> We started with a syncobj with point 1 & 2 signaled.
>
> We take point 2 and import it as a new point 3 on the same syncobj.
>
> We expect point 3 to be signaled as well and it's not.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> -Lionel
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>> dma_fence_array_create() {
>>>     ...
>>>     atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>>>     ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> This is not considering the fact that some of the fences could already
>>> have been signaled as is the case in the 
>>> igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>> test. See 
>>> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/shard-dg1-12/igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point.html
>>>
>>> Quick patch on this function fixes it for me:
>>>
>>> ---------8<----------------
>>> Subject: [PATCH] dma-buf: Honor already signaled fences on array 
>>> creation
>>>
>>> When creating an array, array->num_pending is marked with the number of
>>> fences. However the fences could alredy have been signaled. Propagate
>>> num_pending to the array by looking at each individual fence the array
>>> contains.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c 
>>> b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>>> index 5c8a7084577b..32f491c32fa0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>>> @@ -158,6 +158,8 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
>>> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>>>  {
>>>      struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>>      size_t size = sizeof(*array);
>>> +    unsigned num_pending = 0;
>>> +    struct dma_fence **f;
>>>
>>>      WARN_ON(!num_fences || !fences);
>>>
>>> @@ -173,7 +175,14 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
>>> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>>>      init_irq_work(&array->work, irq_dma_fence_array_work);
>>>
>>>      array->num_fences = num_fences;
>>> -    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>>> +
>>> +    for (f = fences; f < fences + num_fences; f++)
>>> +        num_pending += !dma_fence_is_signaled(*f);
>>> +
>>> +    if (signal_on_any)
>>> +        num_pending = !!num_pending;
>>> +
>>> +    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, num_pending);
>>>      array->fences = fences;
>>>
>>>      array->base.error = PENDING_ERROR;
>>
>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/syncobj: flatten dma_fence_chains on transfer

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 30/05/2022 14:40, Christian König wrote:
> Am 30.05.22 um 12:09 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>> On 30/05/2022 12:52, Christian König wrote:
>>> Am 25.05.22 um 23:59 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:
>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>>>>> Am 25.05.22 um 11:35 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
>>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Err... Let's double check with my colleagues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems we're running into a test failure in IGT with this 
>>>>>> patch, but now I have doubts that it's where the problem lies.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, exactly that's what I couldn't understand as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> What you describe above should still work fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for taking a look into this,
>>>>> Christian.
>>>>
>>>> With some additional prints:
>>>>
>>>> [  210.742634] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
>>>> [  210.742686] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: executing
>>>> [  210.756988] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: starting subtest 
>>>> transfer-timeline-point
>>>> [  210.757364] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* adding 
>>>> fence0 signaled=1
>>>> [  210.764543] [drm:drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl] *ERROR* resulting 
>>>> array fence signaled=0
>>>> [  210.800469] [IGT] syncobj_timeline: exiting, ret=98
>>>> [  210.825426] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 240x67
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> still learning this part of the code but AFAICS the problem is because
>>>> when we are creating the array, the 'signaled' doesn't propagate to 
>>>> the
>>>> array.
>>>
>>> Yeah, but that is intentionally. The array should only signal when 
>>> requested.
>>>
>>> I still don't get what the test case here is checking.
>>
>>
>> There must be something I don't know about fence arrays.
>>
>> You seem to say that creating an array of signaled fences will not 
>> make the array signaled.
>
> Exactly that, yes. The array delays it's signaling until somebody asks 
> for it.
>
> In other words the fences inside the array are check only after 
> someone calls dma_fence_enable_sw_signaling() which in turn calls 
> dma_fence_array_enable_signaling().
>
> It is certainly possible that nobody does that in the drm_syncobj and 
> because of this the array never signals.
>
> Regards,
> Christian.


Thanks,


Yeah I guess dma_fence_enable_sw_signaling() is never called for sw_sync.

Don't we also want to call it right at the end of 
drm_syncobj_flatten_chain() ?


-Lionel


>
>>
>>
>> This is the situation with this IGT test.
>>
>> We started with a syncobj with point 1 & 2 signaled.
>>
>> We take point 2 and import it as a new point 3 on the same syncobj.
>>
>> We expect point 3 to be signaled as well and it's not.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> -Lionel
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> dma_fence_array_create() {
>>>>     ...
>>>>     atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>>>>     ...
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> This is not considering the fact that some of the fences could already
>>>> have been signaled as is the case in the 
>>>> igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point
>>>> test. See 
>>>> https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11693/shard-dg1-12/igt@syncobj_timeline@transfer-timeline-point.html
>>>>
>>>> Quick patch on this function fixes it for me:
>>>>
>>>> ---------8<----------------
>>>> Subject: [PATCH] dma-buf: Honor already signaled fences on array 
>>>> creation
>>>>
>>>> When creating an array, array->num_pending is marked with the 
>>>> number of
>>>> fences. However the fences could alredy have been signaled. Propagate
>>>> num_pending to the array by looking at each individual fence the array
>>>> contains.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c 
>>>> b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>>>> index 5c8a7084577b..32f491c32fa0 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
>>>> @@ -158,6 +158,8 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
>>>> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>>>>  {
>>>>      struct dma_fence_array *array;
>>>>      size_t size = sizeof(*array);
>>>> +    unsigned num_pending = 0;
>>>> +    struct dma_fence **f;
>>>>
>>>>      WARN_ON(!num_fences || !fences);
>>>>
>>>> @@ -173,7 +175,14 @@ struct dma_fence_array 
>>>> *dma_fence_array_create(int num_fences,
>>>>      init_irq_work(&array->work, irq_dma_fence_array_work);
>>>>
>>>>      array->num_fences = num_fences;
>>>> -    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, signal_on_any ? 1 : num_fences);
>>>> +
>>>> +    for (f = fences; f < fences + num_fences; f++)
>>>> +        num_pending += !dma_fence_is_signaled(*f);
>>>> +
>>>> +    if (signal_on_any)
>>>> +        num_pending = !!num_pending;
>>>> +
>>>> +    atomic_set(&array->num_pending, num_pending);
>>>>      array->fences = fences;
>>>>
>>>>      array->base.error = PENDING_ERROR;
>>>
>>
>