[PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Daniele Ceraolo Spurio]

In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. However,
the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
function.
To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.

Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to work with GuC")
Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active:	spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
 		active_count++;
 
 	if (remaining_timeout)
-		*remaining_timeout = timeout;
+		*remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;
 
 	return active_count ? timeout : 0;
 }
-- 
2.25.1

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Daniele Ceraolo Spurio]

In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. However,
the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
function.
To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.

Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to work with GuC")
Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active:	spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
 		active_count++;
 
 	if (remaining_timeout)
-		*remaining_timeout = timeout;
+		*remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;
 
 	return active_count ? timeout : 0;
 }
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Matthew Brost]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:58:39AM -0700, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
> intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. However,
> the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
> during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
> function.
> To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.
> 
> Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to work with GuC")
> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active:	spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
>  		active_count++;
>  
>  	if (remaining_timeout)
> -		*remaining_timeout = timeout;
> +		*remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;
>  
>  	return active_count ? timeout : 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Matthew Brost]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:58:39AM -0700, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
> intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. However,
> the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
> during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
> function.
> To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.
> 
> Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to work with GuC")
> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active:	spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
>  		active_count++;
>  
>  	if (remaining_timeout)
> -		*remaining_timeout = timeout;
> +		*remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;
>  
>  	return active_count ? timeout : 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Das, Nirmoy]

On 3/25/2022 6:58 PM, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
> In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
> intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. However,
> the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
> during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
> function.
> To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.
>
> Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to work with GuC")
> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active:	spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
>   		active_count++;
>   
>   	if (remaining_timeout)
> -		*remaining_timeout = timeout;
> +		*remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;


Should the last flush_submission() be  "if ( timeout > 0 
&&flush_submission(gt, timeout))" ?


Nirmoy

>   
>   	return active_count ? timeout : 0;
>   }

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: warning for drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101805/
State : warning

== Summary ==

$ make htmldocs 2>&1 > /dev/null | grep i915
./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_drrs.c:1: warning: 'intel_drrs_enable' not found
./drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_drrs.c:1: warning: 'intel_drrs_disable' not found

[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Patchwork]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 13212 bytes --]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/101805/
State : failure

== Summary ==

CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_11407 -> Patchwork_22690
====================================================

Summary
-------

  **FAILURE**

  Serious unknown changes coming with Patchwork_22690 absolutely need to be
  verified manually.
  
  If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
  introduced in Patchwork_22690, please notify your bug team to allow them
  to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.

  External URL: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/index.html

Participating hosts (46 -> 32)
------------------------------

  Additional (1): fi-pnv-d510 
  Missing    (15): fi-jsl-1 fi-bdw-samus shard-tglu bat-dg1-6 bat-dg2-8 bat-dg2-9 fi-bsw-cyan bat-adlp-6 bat-adlp-4 bat-hsw-1 bat-rpls-1 bat-rpls-2 bat-jsl-2 bat-jsl-1 fi-skl-6700k2 

Possible new issues
-------------------

  Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_22690:

### IGT changes ###

#### Possible regressions ####

  * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind:
    - fi-bsw-n3050:       NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][1]
   [1]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html
    - fi-cfl-guc:         NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][2]
   [2]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-guc/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html
    - fi-glk-dsi:         [PASS][3] -> [INCOMPLETE][4]
   [3]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-glk-dsi/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html
   [4]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-glk-dsi/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html

  * igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic:
    - fi-pnv-d510:        NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][5]
   [5]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-pnv-d510/igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic.html
    - fi-snb-2520m:       [PASS][6] -> [INCOMPLETE][7]
   [6]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-snb-2520m/igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic.html
   [7]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-snb-2520m/igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic.html

  * igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic:
    - fi-bsw-nick:        [PASS][8] -> [INCOMPLETE][9]
   [8]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-bsw-nick/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [9]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-nick/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
    - fi-kbl-7500u:       [PASS][10] -> [INCOMPLETE][11]
   [10]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [11]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-7500u/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html

  * igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic:
    - fi-hsw-4770:        [PASS][12] -> [INCOMPLETE][13]
   [12]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-hsw-4770/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [13]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-hsw-4770/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
    - fi-ilk-650:         NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][14]
   [14]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-ilk-650/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
    - fi-cfl-8109u:       [PASS][15] -> [INCOMPLETE][16]
   [15]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [16]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-8109u/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
    - fi-kbl-7567u:       [PASS][17] -> [INCOMPLETE][18]
   [17]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [18]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-7567u/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html

  
#### Suppressed ####

  The following results come from untrusted machines, tests, or statuses.
  They do not affect the overall result.

  * igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic:
    - {fi-hsw-g3258}:     [PASS][19] -> [INCOMPLETE][20]
   [19]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-hsw-g3258/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [20]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-hsw-g3258/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html

  
Known issues
------------

  Here are the changes found in Patchwork_22690 that come from known issues:

### IGT changes ###

#### Issues hit ####

  * igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@query-info:
    - fi-tgl-1115g4:      NOTRUN -> [SKIP][21] ([fdo#109315])
   [21]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@amdgpu/amd_basic@query-info.html

  * igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@nop-gfx0:
    - fi-tgl-1115g4:      NOTRUN -> [SKIP][22] ([fdo#109315] / [i915#2575]) +16 similar issues
   [22]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@amdgpu/amd_cs_nop@nop-gfx0.html

  * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind:
    - fi-kbl-soraka:      NOTRUN -> [INCOMPLETE][23] ([i915#1373])
   [23]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html

  * igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy:
    - fi-pnv-d510:        NOTRUN -> [SKIP][24] ([fdo#109271]) +9 similar issues
   [24]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-pnv-d510/igt@gem_huc_copy@huc-copy.html

  * igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic:
    - fi-cfl-8700k:       [PASS][25] -> [INCOMPLETE][26] ([i915#1982])
   [25]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-cfl-8700k/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [26]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-8700k/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html

  * igt@gem_softpin@allocator-basic-reserve:
    - fi-ilk-650:         NOTRUN -> [SKIP][27] ([fdo#109271]) +1 similar issue
   [27]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-ilk-650/igt@gem_softpin@allocator-basic-reserve.html

  * igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend:
    - fi-kbl-soraka:      NOTRUN -> [SKIP][28] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827]) +8 similar issues
   [28]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@kms_chamelium@common-hpd-after-suspend.html

  * igt@kms_chamelium@dp-edid-read:
    - fi-cfl-guc:         NOTRUN -> [SKIP][29] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827]) +8 similar issues
   [29]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-guc/igt@kms_chamelium@dp-edid-read.html

  * igt@kms_chamelium@hdmi-crc-fast:
    - fi-bsw-n3050:       NOTRUN -> [SKIP][30] ([fdo#109271] / [fdo#111827]) +8 similar issues
   [30]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@kms_chamelium@hdmi-crc-fast.html

  * igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-atomic:
    - fi-cfl-guc:         NOTRUN -> [SKIP][31] ([fdo#109271]) +9 similar issues
   [31]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-guc/igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-atomic.html

  * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-d:
    - fi-kbl-soraka:      NOTRUN -> [SKIP][32] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#533])
   [32]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-d.html
    - fi-cfl-guc:         NOTRUN -> [SKIP][33] ([fdo#109271] / [i915#533])
   [33]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-guc/igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@compare-crc-sanitycheck-pipe-d.html

  * igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@hang-read-crc-pipe-a:
    - fi-bsw-n3050:       NOTRUN -> [SKIP][34] ([fdo#109271]) +22 similar issues
   [34]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@hang-read-crc-pipe-a.html

  * igt@kms_setmode@basic-clone-single-crtc:
    - fi-kbl-soraka:      NOTRUN -> [SKIP][35] ([fdo#109271]) +5 similar issues
   [35]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@kms_setmode@basic-clone-single-crtc.html

  * igt@runner@aborted:
    - fi-pnv-d510:        NOTRUN -> [FAIL][36] ([i915#2403] / [i915#4312])
   [36]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-pnv-d510/igt@runner@aborted.html
    - fi-glk-dsi:         NOTRUN -> [FAIL][37] ([i915#4312] / [k.org#202321])
   [37]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-glk-dsi/igt@runner@aborted.html
    - fi-hsw-4770:        NOTRUN -> [FAIL][38] ([i915#4312])
   [38]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-hsw-4770/igt@runner@aborted.html

  
#### Possible fixes ####

  * igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind:
    - fi-tgl-1115g4:      [INCOMPLETE][39] ([i915#1373]) -> [PASS][40]
   [39]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html
   [40]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-tgl-1115g4/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html
    - {fi-ehl-2}:         [INCOMPLETE][41] -> [PASS][42]
   [41]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-ehl-2/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html
   [42]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-ehl-2/igt@core_hotunplug@unbind-rebind.html

  * igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic:
    - fi-ilk-650:         [INCOMPLETE][43] -> [PASS][44]
   [43]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-ilk-650/igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic.html
   [44]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-ilk-650/igt@gem_render_linear_blits@basic.html

  * igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic:
    - fi-kbl-soraka:      [INCOMPLETE][45] -> [PASS][46]
   [45]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [46]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-kbl-soraka/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
    - fi-bsw-n3050:       [INCOMPLETE][47] -> [PASS][48]
   [47]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [48]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@gem_render_tiled_blits@basic.html

  * igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic:
    - fi-cfl-guc:         [INCOMPLETE][49] -> [PASS][50]
   [49]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-cfl-guc/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html
   [50]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-cfl-guc/igt@gem_tiled_blits@basic.html

  * igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank@a-edp1:
    - fi-bsw-kefka:       [FAIL][51] ([i915#2122]) -> [PASS][52]
   [51]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank@a-edp1.html
   [52]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-kefka/igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-wf_vblank@a-edp1.html

  
#### Warnings ####

  * igt@runner@aborted:
    - fi-bsw-nick:        [FAIL][53] ([i915#4312]) -> [FAIL][54] ([i915#3428] / [i915#4312])
   [53]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-bsw-nick/igt@runner@aborted.html
   [54]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-nick/igt@runner@aborted.html
    - fi-bsw-n3050:       [FAIL][55] ([i915#3428] / [i915#4312]) -> [FAIL][56] ([i915#4312])
   [55]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/CI_DRM_11407/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@runner@aborted.html
   [56]: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/fi-bsw-n3050/igt@runner@aborted.html

  
  {name}: This element is suppressed. This means it is ignored when computing
          the status of the difference (SUCCESS, WARNING, or FAILURE).

  [fdo#109271]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109271
  [fdo#109315]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
  [fdo#111827]: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111827
  [i915#1373]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1373
  [i915#1982]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1982
  [i915#2122]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2122
  [i915#2403]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2403
  [i915#2575]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/2575
  [i915#3428]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/3428
  [i915#4312]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/4312
  [i915#5127]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/5127
  [i915#533]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/533
  [k.org#202321]: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202321


Build changes
-------------

  * Linux: CI_DRM_11407 -> Patchwork_22690

  CI-20190529: 20190529
  CI_DRM_11407: a2fff1c90d9587c65608497d5bf5781c073bf46a @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGT_6393: 1d267ea1b829fa10b31a37ccf6b4a970f032784a @ https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools.git
  Patchwork_22690: 2846541256d36c3fcb989859759245e0a2f01495 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux


== Linux commits ==

2846541256d3 drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22690/index.html

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 16070 bytes --]

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele]

On 3/25/2022 11:37 AM, Das, Nirmoy wrote:
>
> On 3/25/2022 6:58 PM, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
>> In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
>> intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. However,
>> the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
>> during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
>> function.
>> To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.
>>
>> Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to 
>> work with GuC")
>> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>> Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
>> index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
>> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active: spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
>>           active_count++;
>>         if (remaining_timeout)
>> -        *remaining_timeout = timeout;
>> +        *remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;
>
>
> Should the last flush_submission() be  "if ( timeout > 0 
> &&flush_submission(gt, timeout))" ?

I considered it, but flush_submission only checks for timeout != 0 so it 
won't accidentally make use of a negative value thinking it's positive. 
I don't know if the flush is purposely done even if timeout is negative 
or if that's a mistake, but that code has been there long before we 
modified the function to return the remaining timeout and never seems to 
have caused issues, so I decided not to change it.

Daniele

>
>
> Nirmoy
>
>>         return active_count ? timeout : 0;
>>   }

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix remaining_timeout in intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout

[Das, Nirmoy]

On 3/25/2022 9:33 PM, Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele wrote:
>
>
> On 3/25/2022 11:37 AM, Das, Nirmoy wrote:
>>
>> On 3/25/2022 6:58 PM, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
>>> In intel_gt_wait_for_idle, we use the remaining timeout returned from
>>> intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout to wait on the GuC being idle. 
>>> However,
>>> the returned variable can have a negative value if something goes wrong
>>> during the wait, leading to us hitting a GEM_BUG_ON in the GuC wait
>>> function.
>>> To fix this, make sure to only return the timeout if it is positive.
>>>
>>> Fixes: b97060a99b01b ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle 
>>> to work with GuC")
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>>> Cc: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c 
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
>>> index edb881d756309..ef70c209976d8 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
>>> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ out_active: spin_lock(&timelines->lock);
>>>           active_count++;
>>>         if (remaining_timeout)
>>> -        *remaining_timeout = timeout;
>>> +        *remaining_timeout = timeout > 0 ? timeout : 0;
>>
>>
>> Should the last flush_submission() be  "if ( timeout > 0 
>> &&flush_submission(gt, timeout))" ?
>
> I considered it, but flush_submission only checks for timeout != 0 so 
> it won't accidentally make use of a negative value thinking it's 
> positive. I don't know if the flush is purposely done even if timeout 
> is negative or if that's a mistake, but that code has been there long 
> before we modified the function to return the remaining timeout and 
> never seems to have caused issues, so I decided not to change it.


Yes, we need clarify if we really need the final flush if the timeout is 
negative.

But this patch  is Acked-by: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>

Nirmoy

>
> Daniele
>
>>
>>
>> Nirmoy
>>
>>>         return active_count ? timeout : 0;
>>>   }
>