1. 10 12月, 2019 1 次提交
    • D
      drm/i915/guc: kill doorbell code and selftests · e9362e13
      Daniele Ceraolo Spurio 提交于
      Instead of relying on the workqueue, the upcoming reworked GuC
      submission flow will offer the host driver indipendent control over
      the execution status of each context submitted to GuC. As part of this,
      the doorbell usage model has been reworked, with each doorbell being
      paired to a single lrc and a doorbell ring representing new work
      available for that specific context. This mechanism, however, limits
      the number of contexts that can be registered with GuC to the number of
      doorbells, which is an undesired limitation. To avoid this limitation,
      we requested the GuC team to also provide a H2G that will allow the host
      to notify the GuC of work available for a specified lrc, so we can use
      that mechanism instead of relying on the doorbells. We can therefore drop
      the doorbell code we currently have, also given the fact that in the
      unlikely case we'd want to switch back to using doorbells we'd have to
      heavily rework it.
      The workqueue will still have a use in the new interface to pass special
      commands, so that code has been retained for now.
      
      With the doorbells gone and the GuC client becoming even simpler, the
      existing GuC selftests don't give us any meaningful coverage so we can
      remove them as well. Some selftests might come with the new code, but
      they will look different from what we have now so if doesn't seem worth
      it to keep the file around in the meantime.
      
      v2: fix comments and commit message (John)
      Signed-off-by: NDaniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>
      Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
      Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
      Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
      Reviewed-by: NJohn Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
      Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191205220243.27403-3-daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com
      e9362e13
  2. 14 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  3. 12 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  4. 02 8月, 2019 1 次提交
  5. 14 7月, 2019 1 次提交
  6. 11 7月, 2019 1 次提交
  7. 25 4月, 2019 1 次提交
  8. 02 4月, 2019 1 次提交
  9. 28 8月, 2018 1 次提交
  10. 14 12月, 2017 1 次提交
    • M
      drm/i915/guc: Move GuC workqueue allocations outside of the mutex · 3176ff49
      Michał Winiarski 提交于
      This gets rid of the following lockdep splat:
      
      ======================================================
      WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
      4.15.0-rc2-CI-Patchwork_7428+ #1 Not tainted
      ------------------------------------------------------
      debugfs_test/1351 is trying to acquire lock:
       (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<000000009d90d1a3>] i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
      
      but task is already holding lock:
       (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: [<000000005df01c1e>] __do_page_fault+0x106/0x560
      
      which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
      the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
      -> #6 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
             __might_fault+0x63/0x90
             _copy_to_user+0x1e/0x70
             filldir+0x8c/0xf0
             dcache_readdir+0xeb/0x160
             iterate_dir+0xe6/0x150
             SyS_getdents+0xa0/0x130
             entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0x89
      
      -> #5 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#5){++++}:
             lockref_get+0x9/0x20
      
      -> #4 ((completion)&req.done){+.+.}:
             wait_for_common+0x54/0x210
             devtmpfs_create_node+0x130/0x150
             device_add+0x5ad/0x5e0
             device_create_groups_vargs+0xd4/0xe0
             device_create+0x35/0x40
             msr_device_create+0x22/0x40
             cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xc5/0xbf0
             cpuhp_thread_fun+0x167/0x210
             smpboot_thread_fn+0x17f/0x270
             kthread+0x173/0x1b0
             ret_from_fork+0x24/0x30
      
      -> #3 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}:
             cpuhp_issue_call+0x132/0x1c0
             __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x12f/0x2a0
             __cpuhp_setup_state+0x3a/0x50
             page_writeback_init+0x3a/0x5c
             start_kernel+0x393/0x3e2
             secondary_startup_64+0xa5/0xb0
      
      -> #2 (cpuhp_state_mutex){+.+.}:
             __mutex_lock+0x81/0x9b0
             __cpuhp_setup_state_cpuslocked+0x4b/0x2a0
             __cpuhp_setup_state+0x3a/0x50
             page_alloc_init+0x1f/0x26
             start_kernel+0x139/0x3e2
             secondary_startup_64+0xa5/0xb0
      
      -> #1 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
             cpus_read_lock+0x34/0xa0
             apply_workqueue_attrs+0xd/0x40
             __alloc_workqueue_key+0x2c7/0x4e1
             intel_guc_submission_init+0x10c/0x650 [i915]
             intel_uc_init_hw+0x29e/0x460 [i915]
             i915_gem_init_hw+0xca/0x290 [i915]
             i915_gem_init+0x115/0x3a0 [i915]
             i915_driver_load+0x9a8/0x16c0 [i915]
             i915_pci_probe+0x2e/0x90 [i915]
             pci_device_probe+0x9c/0x120
             driver_probe_device+0x2a3/0x480
             __driver_attach+0xd9/0xe0
             bus_for_each_dev+0x57/0x90
             bus_add_driver+0x168/0x260
             driver_register+0x52/0xc0
             do_one_initcall+0x39/0x150
             do_init_module+0x56/0x1ef
             load_module+0x231c/0x2d70
             SyS_finit_module+0xa5/0xe0
             entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1c/0x89
      
      -> #0 (&dev->struct_mutex){+.+.}:
             lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
             __mutex_lock+0x81/0x9b0
             i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
             i915_gem_fault+0x201/0x760 [i915]
             __do_fault+0x15/0x70
             __handle_mm_fault+0x85b/0xe40
             handle_mm_fault+0x14f/0x2f0
             __do_page_fault+0x2d1/0x560
             page_fault+0x22/0x30
      
      other info that might help us debug this:
      
      Chain exists of:
        &dev->struct_mutex --> &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#5 --> &mm->mmap_sem
      
       Possible unsafe locking scenario:
      
             CPU0                    CPU1
             ----                    ----
        lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
                                     lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#5);
                                     lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
        lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
      
       *** DEADLOCK ***
      
      1 lock held by debugfs_test/1351:
       #0:  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: [<000000005df01c1e>] __do_page_fault+0x106/0x560
      
      stack backtrace:
      CPU: 2 PID: 1351 Comm: debugfs_test Not tainted 4.15.0-rc2-CI-Patchwork_7428+ #1
      Hardware name:                  /NUC6i5SYB, BIOS SYSKLi35.86A.0057.2017.0119.1758 01/19/2017
      Call Trace:
       dump_stack+0x5f/0x86
       print_circular_bug+0x230/0x3b0
       check_prev_add+0x439/0x7b0
       ? lockdep_init_map_crosslock+0x20/0x20
       ? unwind_get_return_address+0x16/0x30
       ? __lock_acquire+0x1385/0x15a0
       __lock_acquire+0x1385/0x15a0
       lock_acquire+0xaf/0x200
       ? i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
       __mutex_lock+0x81/0x9b0
       ? i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
       ? i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
       ? i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
       i915_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x47/0x130 [i915]
       ? __pm_runtime_resume+0x4f/0x80
       i915_gem_fault+0x201/0x760 [i915]
       __do_fault+0x15/0x70
       __handle_mm_fault+0x85b/0xe40
       handle_mm_fault+0x14f/0x2f0
       __do_page_fault+0x2d1/0x560
       page_fault+0x22/0x30
      RIP: 0033:0x7f98d6f49116
      RSP: 002b:00007ffd6ffc3278 EFLAGS: 00010283
      RAX: 00007f98d39a2bc0 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000001680
      RDX: 0000000000001680 RSI: 00007ffd6ffc3400 RDI: 00007f98d39a2bc0
      RBP: 00007ffd6ffc33a0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000000005a0
      R10: 000055e847c2a830 R11: 0000000000000002 R12: 0000000000000001
      R13: 000055e847c1d040 R14: 00007ffd6ffc3400 R15: 00007f98d6752ba0
      
      v2: Init preempt_work unconditionally (Chris)
      v3: Mention that we need the enable_guc=1 for lockdep splat (Chris)
      
      Testcase: igt/debugfs_test/read_all_entries # with i915.enable_guc=1
      Signed-off-by: NMichał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@intel.com>
      Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
      Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
      Reviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      Signed-off-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20171213221352.7173-2-michal.winiarski@intel.com
      3176ff49
  11. 24 11月, 2017 1 次提交
  12. 16 11月, 2017 3 次提交
  13. 06 10月, 2017 3 次提交
  14. 05 10月, 2017 4 次提交
  15. 26 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  16. 18 9月, 2017 4 次提交
  17. 07 6月, 2017 1 次提交
  18. 26 5月, 2017 2 次提交
  19. 19 5月, 2017 4 次提交
  20. 11 5月, 2017 2 次提交
  21. 02 5月, 2017 1 次提交
  22. 04 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  23. 01 4月, 2017 1 次提交
  24. 31 3月, 2017 2 次提交