Skip to content

L
linux
Switch branch/tag
  1. 21 Jul, 2020 8 commits
    • Christian König's avatar
      drm/ttm: cleanup coding style and implementation. · c1c440d4
      Christian König authored 
      Only functional change is to always keep io_reserved_count up to date
for debugging even when it is not used otherwise.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/378242/
      c1c440d4
    • Christian König's avatar
      drm/ttm: remove io_reserve_fastpath flag · ce747733
      Christian König authored 
      Just use the use_io_reserve_lru flag. It doesn't make much
sense to have two flags.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/378238/
      ce747733
    • Christian König's avatar
      drm/ttm: cleanup io_mem interface with nouveau · 4b8edc39
      Christian König authored 
      Nouveau is the only user of this functionality and evicting io space
on -EAGAIN is really a misuse of the return code.

Instead switch to using -ENOSPC here which makes much more sense and
simplifies the code.

This could unbreak something as we now cleanly return EAGAIN, but the
chance for this are rather low.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/378237/
      4b8edc39
    • Christian König's avatar
      drm: remove optional dummy function from drivers using TTM · e69acf18
      Christian König authored 
      Implementing those is completely unnecessary.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMadhav Chauhan <madhav.chauhan@amd.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/378236/
      e69acf18
    • Daniel Vetter's avatar
      dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea · 72b6ede7
      Daniel Vetter authored 
      Comes up every few years, gets somewhat tedious to discuss, let's
write this down once and for all.

What I'm not sure about is whether the text should be more explicit in
flat out mandating the amdkfd eviction fences for long running compute
workloads or workloads where userspace fencing is allowed.

v2: Now with dot graph!

v3: Typo (Dave Airlie)
Reviewed-by: default avatarThomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Acked-by: default avatarJason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Acked-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Acked-by: default avatarDaniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>
Acked-by: default avatarDave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMaarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jesse Natalie <jenatali@microsoft.com>
Cc: Steve Pronovost <spronovo@microsoft.com>
Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200709123339.547390-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
      72b6ede7
    • Daniel Vetter's avatar
      dma-fence: prime lockdep annotations · d0b9a9ae
      Daniel Vetter authored 
      Two in one go:
- it is allowed to call dma_fence_wait() while holding a
  dma_resv_lock(). This is fundamental to how eviction works with ttm,
  so required.

- it is allowed to call dma_fence_wait() from memory reclaim contexts,
  specifically from shrinker callbacks (which i915 does), and from mmu
  notifier callbacks (which amdgpu does, and which i915 sometimes also
  does, and probably always should, but that's kinda a debate). Also
  for stuff like HMM we really need to be able to do this, or things
  get real dicey.

Consequence is that any critical path necessary to get to a
dma_fence_signal for a fence must never a) call dma_resv_lock nor b)
allocate memory with GFP_KERNEL. Also by implication of
dma_resv_lock(), no userspace faulting allowed. That's some supremely
obnoxious limitations, which is why we need to sprinkle the right
annotations to all relevant paths.

The one big locking context we're leaving out here is mmu notifiers,
added in

commit 23b68395
Author: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Mon Aug 26 22:14:21 2019 +0200

    mm/mmu_notifiers: add a lockdep map for invalidate_range_start/end

that one covers a lot of other callsites, and it's also allowed to
wait on dma-fences from mmu notifiers. But there's no ready-made
functions exposed to prime this, so I've left it out for now.

v2: Also track against mmu notifier context.

v3: kerneldoc to spec the cross-driver contract. Note that currently
i915 throws in a hard-coded 10s timeout on foreign fences (not sure
why that was done, but it's there), which is why that rule is worded
with SHOULD instead of MUST.

Also some of the mmu_notifier/shrinker rules might surprise SoC
drivers, I haven't fully audited them all. Which is infeasible anyway,
we'll need to run them with lockdep and dma-fence annotations and see
what goes boom.

v4: A spelling fix from Mika

v5: #ifdef for CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER. Reported by 0day. Unfortunately
this means lockdep enforcement is slightly inconsistent, it won't spot
GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS allocations in the wrong spot if
CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER is disabled in the kernel config. Oh well.

v5: Note that only drivers/gpu has a reasonable (or at least
historical) excuse to use dma_fence_wait() from shrinker and mmu
notifier callbacks. Everyone else should either have a better memory
manager model, or better hardware. This reflects discussions with
Jason Gunthorpe.

Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Acked-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Acked-by: default avatarDave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMaarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com> (v4)
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200707201229.472834-3-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
      d0b9a9ae
    • Daniel Vetter's avatar
      dma-fence: basic lockdep annotations · 5fbff813
      Daniel Vetter authored 
      Design is similar to the lockdep annotations for workers, but with
some twists:

- We use a read-lock for the execution/worker/completion side, so that
  this explicit annotation can be more liberally sprinkled around.
  With read locks lockdep isn't going to complain if the read-side
  isn't nested the same way under all circumstances, so ABBA deadlocks
  are ok. Which they are, since this is an annotation only.

- We're using non-recursive lockdep read lock mode, since in recursive
  read lock mode lockdep does not catch read side hazards. And we
  _very_ much want read side hazards to be caught. For full details of
  this limitation see

  commit e9149858
  Author: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
  Date:   Wed Aug 23 13:13:11 2017 +0200

      locking/lockdep/selftests: Add mixed read-write ABBA tests

- To allow nesting of the read-side explicit annotations we explicitly
  keep track of the nesting. lock_is_held() allows us to do that.

- The wait-side annotation is a write lock, and entirely done within
  dma_fence_wait() for everyone by default.

- To be able to freely annotate helper functions I want to make it ok
  to call dma_fence_begin/end_signalling from soft/hardirq context.
  First attempt was using the hardirq locking context for the write
  side in lockdep, but this forces all normal spinlocks nested within
  dma_fence_begin/end_signalling to be spinlocks. That bollocks.

  The approach now is to simple check in_atomic(), and for these cases
  entirely rely on the might_sleep() check in dma_fence_wait(). That
  will catch any wrong nesting against spinlocks from soft/hardirq
  contexts.

The idea here is that every code path that's critical for eventually
signalling a dma_fence should be annotated with
dma_fence_begin/end_signalling. The annotation ideally starts right
after a dma_fence is published (added to a dma_resv, exposed as a
sync_file fd, attached to a drm_syncobj fd, or anything else that
makes the dma_fence visible to other kernel threads), up to and
including the dma_fence_wait(). Examples are irq handlers, the
scheduler rt threads, the tail of execbuf (after the corresponding
fences are visible), any workers that end up signalling dma_fences and
really anything else. Not annotated should be code paths that only
complete fences opportunistically as the gpu progresses, like e.g.
shrinker/eviction code.

The main class of deadlocks this is supposed to catch are:

Thread A:

	mutex_lock(A);
	mutex_unlock(A);

	dma_fence_signal();

Thread B:

	mutex_lock(A);
	dma_fence_wait();
	mutex_unlock(A);

Thread B is blocked on A signalling the fence, but A never gets around
to that because it cannot acquire the lock A.

Note that dma_fence_wait() is allowed to be nested within
dma_fence_begin/end_signalling sections. To allow this to happen the
read lock needs to be upgraded to a write lock, which means that any
other lock is acquired between the dma_fence_begin_signalling() call and
the call to dma_fence_wait(), and still held, this will result in an
immediate lockdep complaint. The only other option would be to not
annotate such calls, defeating the point. Therefore these annotations
cannot be sprinkled over the code entirely mindless to avoid false
positives.

Originally I hope that the cross-release lockdep extensions would
alleviate the need for explicit annotations:

https://lwn.net/Articles/709849/

But there's a few reasons why that's not an option:

- It's not happening in upstream, since it got reverted due to too
  many false positives:

	commit e966eaee
	Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
	Date:   Tue Dec 12 12:31:16 2017 +0100

	    locking/lockdep: Remove the cross-release locking checks

	    This code (CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE=y and CONFIG_LOCKDEP_COMPLETIONS=y),
	    while it found a number of old bugs initially, was also causing too many
	    false positives that caused people to disable lockdep - which is arguably
	    a worse overall outcome.

- cross-release uses the complete() call to annotate the end of
  critical sections, for dma_fence that would be dma_fence_signal().
  But we do not want all dma_fence_signal() calls to be treated as
  critical, since many are opportunistic cleanup of gpu requests. If
  these get stuck there's still the main completion interrupt and
  workers who can unblock everyone. Automatically annotating all
  dma_fence_signal() calls would hence cause false positives.

- cross-release had some educated guesses for when a critical section
  starts, like fresh syscall or fresh work callback. This would again
  cause false positives without explicit annotations, since for
  dma_fence the critical sections only starts when we publish a fence.

- Furthermore there can be cases where a thread never does a
  dma_fence_signal, but is still critical for reaching completion of
  fences. One example would be a scheduler kthread which picks up jobs
  and pushes them into hardware, where the interrupt handler or
  another completion thread calls dma_fence_signal(). But if the
  scheduler thread hangs, then all the fences hang, hence we need to
  manually annotate it. cross-release aimed to solve this by chaining
  cross-release dependencies, but the dependency from scheduler thread
  to the completion interrupt handler goes through hw where
  cross-release code can't observe it.

In short, without manual annotations and careful review of the start
and end of critical sections, cross-relese dependency tracking doesn't
work. We need explicit annotations.

v2: handle soft/hardirq ctx better against write side and dont forget
EXPORT_SYMBOL, drivers can't use this otherwise.

v3: Kerneldoc.

v4: Some spelling fixes from Mika

v5: Amend commit message to explain in detail why cross-release isn't
the solution.

v6: Pull out misplaced .rst hunk.
Acked-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Acked-by: default avatarDave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarThomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMaarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200707201229.472834-2-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
      5fbff813
    • Christian König's avatar
      drm/vram-helper: stop using TTM_MEMTYPE_FLAG_MAPPABLE · 23f166ca
      Christian König authored 
      The helper doesn't expose any not-mapable memory resources.
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarThomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/377649/
      23f166ca
  3. 20 Jul, 2020 12 commits
  5. 19 Jul, 2020 1 commit
  7. 16 Jul, 2020 19 commits
GitLab Nexedi Edition | About GitLab | About Nexedi | 沪ICP备2021021310号-2 | 沪ICP备2021021310号-7