intel-gfx.lists.freedesktop.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [Intel-gfx] [CI 2/2] drm/i915: Avoid using rq->engine after free during i915_fence_release
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 15:06:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200521140617.30015-2-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200521140617.30015-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>

In order to be valid to dereference during the i915_fence_release, after
retiring the fence and releasing its refererences, we assume that
rq->engine can only be a real engine (that stay intact until the device
is shutdown after all fences have been flushed). However, due to a quirk
of preempt-to-busy, we may retire a request that still belongs to a
virtual engine and so eventually free it with rq->engine being invalid.
To avoid dereferencing that invalid engine, we look at the
execution_mask which if it indicates it may be executed on more than one
engine, we know it originated on a virtual engine and may still be on
one.

Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1906
Fixes: 43acd6516ca9 ("drm/i915: Keep a per-engine request pool")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
index 526c1e9acbd5..c282719ad3ac 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
@@ -121,8 +121,39 @@ static void i915_fence_release(struct dma_fence *fence)
 	i915_sw_fence_fini(&rq->submit);
 	i915_sw_fence_fini(&rq->semaphore);
 
-	/* Keep one request on each engine for reserved use under mempressure */
-	if (!cmpxchg(&rq->engine->request_pool, NULL, rq))
+	/*
+	 * Keep one request on each engine for reserved use under mempressure
+	 *
+	 * We do not hold a reference to the engine here and so have to be
+	 * very careful in what rq->engine we poke. The virtual engine is
+	 * referenced via the rq->context and we released that ref during
+	 * i915_request_retire(), ergo we must not dereference a virtual
+	 * engine here. Not that we would want to, as the only consumer of
+	 * the reserved engine->request_pool is the power management parking,
+	 * which must-not-fail, and that is only run on the physical engines.
+	 *
+	 * Since the request must have been executed to be have completed,
+	 * we know that it will have been processed by the HW and will
+	 * not be unsubmitted again, so rq->engine and rq->execution_mask
+	 * at this point is stable. rq->execution_mask will be a single
+	 * bit if the last and _only_ engine it could execution on was a
+	 * physical engine, if it's multiple bits then it started on and
+	 * could still be on a virtual engine. Thus if the mask is not a
+	 * power-of-two we assume that rq->engine may still be a virtual
+	 * engine and so a dangling invalid pointer that we cannot dereference
+	 *
+	 * For example, consider the flow of a bonded request through a virtual
+	 * engine. The request is created with a wide engine mask (all engines
+	 * that we might execute on). On processing the bond, the request mask
+	 * is reduced to one or more engines. If the request is subsequently
+	 * bound to a single engine, it will then be constrained to only
+	 * execute on that engine and never returned to the virtual engine
+	 * after timeslicing away, see __unwind_incomplete_requests(). Thus we
+	 * know that if the rq->execution_mask is a single bit, rq->engine
+	 * can be a physical engine with the exact corresponding mask.
+	 */
+	if (is_power_of_2(rq->execution_mask) &&
+	    !cmpxchg(&rq->engine->request_pool, NULL, rq))
 		return;
 
 	kmem_cache_free(global.slab_requests, rq);
-- 
2.20.1

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

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-21 14:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-21 14:06 [Intel-gfx] [CI 1/2] drm/i915: Disable semaphore inter-engine sync without timeslicing Chris Wilson
2020-05-21 14:06 ` Chris Wilson [this message]
2020-05-21 15:44 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for series starting with [CI,1/2] " Patchwork
2020-05-21 16:05 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2020-05-22  9:36 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

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

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

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

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200521140617.30015-2-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --to=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

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

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).