| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 04:02:59 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: [ 16/37] drm/i915: fixup seqno allocation logic for lazy_request
3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
commit 53d227f282eb9fa4c7cdbfd691fa372b7ca8c4c3 upstream.
Currently we reserve seqnos only when we emit the request to the ring
(by bumping dev_priv->next_seqno), but start using it much earlier for
ring->oustanding_lazy_request. When 2 threads compete for the gpu and
run on two different rings (e.g. ddx on blitter vs. compositor)
hilarity ensued, especially when we get constantly interrupted while
reserving buffers.
Breakage seems to have been introduced in
commit 6f392d548658a17600da7faaf8a5df25ee5f01f6
Author: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Date: Sat Aug 7 11:01:22 2010 +0100
drm/i915: Use a common seqno for all rings.
This patch fixes up the seqno reservation logic by moving it into
i915_gem_next_request_seqno. The ring->add_request functions now
superflously still return the new seqno through a pointer, that will
be refactored in the next patch.
Note that with this change we now unconditionally allocate a seqno,
even when ->add_request might fail because the rings are full and the
gpu died. But this does not open up a new can of worms because we can
already leave behind an outstanding_request_seqno if e.g. the caller
gets interrupted with a signal while stalling for the gpu in the
eviciton paths. And with the bugfix we only ever have one seqno
allocated per ring (and only that ring), so there are no ordering
issues with multiple outstanding seqnos on the same ring.
v2: Keep i915_gem_get_seqno (but move it to i915_gem.c) to make it
clear that we only have one seqno counter for all rings. Suggested by
Chris Wilson.
v3: As suggested by Chris Wilson use i915_gem_next_request_seqno
instead of ring->oustanding_lazy_request to make the follow-up
refactoring more clearly correct. Also improve the commit message
with issues discussed on irc.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45181
Tested-by: Nicolas Kalkhof nkalkhof()at()web.de
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 7 +------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 24 ++++--------------------
3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
index 000a9ad..563d24e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
@@ -1177,12 +1177,7 @@ i915_seqno_passed(uint32_t seq1, uint32_t seq2)
return (int32_t)(seq1 - seq2) >= 0;
}
-static inline u32
-i915_gem_next_request_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring)
-{
- drm_i915_private_t *dev_priv = ring->dev->dev_private;
- return ring->outstanding_lazy_request = dev_priv->next_seqno;
-}
+u32 i915_gem_next_request_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring);
int __must_check i915_gem_object_get_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
struct intel_ring_buffer *pipelined);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 2b51e9c..2031cc7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -1576,6 +1576,28 @@ i915_gem_process_flushing_list(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
}
}
+static u32
+i915_gem_get_seqno(struct drm_device *dev)
+{
+ drm_i915_private_t *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
+ u32 seqno = dev_priv->next_seqno;
+
+ /* reserve 0 for non-seqno */
+ if (++dev_priv->next_seqno == 0)
+ dev_priv->next_seqno = 1;
+
+ return seqno;
+}
+
+u32
+i915_gem_next_request_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring)
+{
+ if (ring->outstanding_lazy_request == 0)
+ ring->outstanding_lazy_request = i915_gem_get_seqno(ring->dev);
+
+ return ring->outstanding_lazy_request;
+}
+
int
i915_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
struct drm_file *file,
@@ -1587,6 +1609,7 @@ i915_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
int ret;
BUG_ON(request == NULL);
+ seqno = i915_gem_next_request_seqno(ring);
ret = ring->add_request(ring, &seqno);
if (ret)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
index 4956f1b..8a983b5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
@@ -52,20 +52,6 @@ static inline int ring_space(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring)
return space;
}
-static u32 i915_gem_get_seqno(struct drm_device *dev)
-{
- drm_i915_private_t *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
- u32 seqno;
-
- seqno = dev_priv->next_seqno;
-
- /* reserve 0 for non-seqno */
- if (++dev_priv->next_seqno == 0)
- dev_priv->next_seqno = 1;
-
- return seqno;
-}
-
static int
render_ring_flush(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
u32 invalidate_domains,
@@ -465,7 +451,7 @@ gen6_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
mbox1_reg = ring->signal_mbox[0];
mbox2_reg = ring->signal_mbox[1];
- *seqno = i915_gem_get_seqno(ring->dev);
+ *seqno = i915_gem_next_request_seqno(ring);
update_mboxes(ring, *seqno, mbox1_reg);
update_mboxes(ring, *seqno, mbox2_reg);
@@ -563,8 +549,7 @@ static int
pc_render_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
u32 *result)
{
- struct drm_device *dev = ring->dev;
- u32 seqno = i915_gem_get_seqno(dev);
+ u32 seqno = i915_gem_next_request_seqno(ring);
struct pipe_control *pc = ring->private;
u32 scratch_addr = pc->gtt_offset + 128;
int ret;
@@ -615,8 +600,7 @@ static int
render_ring_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
u32 *result)
{
- struct drm_device *dev = ring->dev;
- u32 seqno = i915_gem_get_seqno(dev);
+ u32 seqno = i915_gem_next_request_seqno(ring);
int ret;
ret = intel_ring_begin(ring, 4);
@@ -790,7 +774,7 @@ ring_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring,
if (ret)
return ret;
- seqno = i915_gem_get_seqno(ring->dev);
+ seqno = i915_gem_next_request_seqno(ring);
intel_ring_emit(ring, MI_STORE_DWORD_INDEX);
intel_ring_emit(ring, I915_GEM_HWS_INDEX << MI_STORE_DWORD_INDEX_SHIFT);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists