| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5374BB4A.6070102@canonical.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:04:10 +0200
From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>
To: Christian König <deathsimple@...afone.de>,
airlied@...ux.ie
CC: nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 08/16] drm/radeon: use common fence implementation
for fences
op 15-05-14 11:42, Christian König schreef:
> Am 15.05.2014 11:38, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
>> op 15-05-14 11:21, Christian König schreef:
>>> Am 15.05.2014 03:06, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
>>>> op 14-05-14 17:29, Christian König schreef:
>>>>>> + /* did fence get signaled after we enabled the sw irq? */
>>>>>> + if (atomic64_read(&fence->rdev->fence_drv[fence->ring].last_seq) >= fence->seq) {
>>>>>> + radeon_irq_kms_sw_irq_put(fence->rdev, fence->ring);
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + fence->fence_wake.flags = 0;
>>>>>> + fence->fence_wake.private = NULL;
>>>>>> + fence->fence_wake.func = radeon_fence_check_signaled;
>>>>>> + __add_wait_queue(&fence->rdev->fence_queue, &fence->fence_wake);
>>>>>> + fence_get(f);
>>>>> That looks like a race condition to me. The fence needs to be added to the wait queue before the check, not after.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apart from that the whole approach looks like a really bad idea to me. How for example is lockup detection supposed to happen with this?
>>>> It's not a race condition because fence_queue.lock is held when this function is called.
>>> Ah, I see. That's also the reason why you moved the wake_up_all out of the processing function.
>> Correct. :-)
>>>> Lockup's a bit of a weird problem, the changes wouldn't allow core ttm code to handle the lockup any more,
>>>> but any driver specific wait code would still handle this. I did this by design, because in future patches the wait
>>>> function may be called from outside of the radeon driver. The official wait function takes a timeout parameter,
>>>> so lockups wouldn't be fatal if the timeout is set to something like 30*HZ for example, it would still return
>>>> and report that the function timed out.
>>> Timeouts help with the detection of the lockup, but not at all with the handling of them.
>>>
>>> What we essentially need is a wait callback into the driver that is called in non atomic context without any locks held.
>>>
>>> This way we can block for the fence to become signaled with a timeout and can then also initiate the reset handling if necessary.
>>>
>>> The way you designed the interface now means that the driver never gets a chance to wait for the hardware to become idle and so never has the opportunity to the reset the whole thing.
>> You could set up a hangcheck timer like intel does, and end up with a reliable hangcheck detection that doesn't depend on cpu waits. :-) Or override the default wait function and restore the old behavior.
>
> Overriding the default wait function sounds better, please implement it this way.
>
> Thanks,
> Christian.
Does this modification look sane?
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
index bc844f300d3f..2d415eb2834a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c
@@ -361,28 +361,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq)
}
/**
- * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers
+ * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers
*
* @rdev: radeon device pointer
* @target_seq: sequence number(s) we want to wait for
* @intr: use interruptable sleep
+ * @timeout: maximum time to wait, or MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT for infinite wait
*
* Wait for the requested sequence number(s) to be written by any ring
* (all asics). Sequnce number array is indexed by ring id.
* @intr selects whether to use interruptable (true) or non-interruptable
* (false) sleep when waiting for the sequence number. Helper function
* for radeon_fence_wait_*().
- * Returns 0 if the sequence number has passed, error for all other cases.
+ * Returns remaining time if the sequence number has passed, 0 when
+ * the wait timeout, or an error for all other cases.
* -EDEADLK is returned when a GPU lockup has been detected.
*/
-static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
- bool intr)
+static int radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout(struct radeon_device *rdev,
+ u64 *target_seq, bool intr,
+ long timeout)
{
uint64_t last_seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS];
bool signaled;
- int i, r;
+ int i;
while (!radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq)) {
+ long r, waited = timeout;
+
+ waited = timeout < RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT ?
+ timeout : RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT;
/* Save current sequence values, used to check for GPU lockups */
for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
@@ -397,13 +404,15 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
if (intr) {
r = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(rdev->fence_queue, (
(signaled = radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq))
- || rdev->needs_reset), RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT);
+ || rdev->needs_reset), waited);
} else {
r = wait_event_timeout(rdev->fence_queue, (
(signaled = radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq))
- || rdev->needs_reset), RADEON_FENCE_JIFFIES_TIMEOUT);
+ || rdev->needs_reset), waited);
}
+ timeout -= waited - r;
+
for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
if (!target_seq[i])
continue;
@@ -415,6 +424,12 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
if (unlikely(r < 0))
return r;
+ /*
+ * If this is a timed wait and the wait completely timed out just return.
+ */
+ if (!timeout)
+ break;
+
if (unlikely(!signaled)) {
if (rdev->needs_reset)
return -EDEADLK;
@@ -457,7 +472,7 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq,
}
}
}
- return 0;
+ return timeout;
}
/**
@@ -480,8 +495,8 @@ int radeon_fence_wait(struct radeon_fence *fence, bool intr)
return 0;
seq[fence->ring] = fence->seq;
- r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(fence->rdev, seq, intr);
- if (r) {
+ r = radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout(fence->rdev, seq, intr, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
+ if (r < 0) {
return r;
}
r = fence_signal(&fence->base);
@@ -509,7 +524,7 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev,
{
uint64_t seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS];
unsigned i, num_rings = 0;
- int r;
+ long r;
for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) {
seq[i] = 0;
@@ -531,8 +546,8 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev,
if (num_rings == 0)
return -ENOENT;
- r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, intr);
- if (r) {
+ r = radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout(rdev, seq, intr, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
+ if (r < 0) {
return r;
}
return 0;
@@ -551,6 +566,7 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_any(struct radeon_device *rdev,
int radeon_fence_wait_next(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
{
uint64_t seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS] = {};
+ long r;
seq[ring] = atomic64_read(&rdev->fence_drv[ring].last_seq) + 1ULL;
if (seq[ring] >= rdev->fence_drv[ring].sync_seq[ring]) {
@@ -558,7 +574,10 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_next(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
already the last emited fence */
return -ENOENT;
}
- return radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, false);
+ r = radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout(rdev, seq, false, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
+ if (r < 0)
+ return r;
+ return 0;
}
/**
@@ -580,8 +599,8 @@ int radeon_fence_wait_empty(struct radeon_device *rdev, int ring)
if (!seq[ring])
return 0;
- r = radeon_fence_wait_seq(rdev, seq, false);
- if (r) {
+ r = radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout(rdev, seq, false, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
+ if (r < 0) {
if (r == -EDEADLK)
return -EDEADLK;
@@ -908,6 +927,15 @@ int radeon_debugfs_fence_init(struct radeon_device *rdev)
#endif
}
+static long __radeon_fence_wait(struct fence *f, bool intr, long timeout)
+{
+ struct radeon_fence *fence = to_radeon_fence(f);
+ u64 target_seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS] = {};
+
+ target_seq[fence->ring] = fence->seq;
+ return radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout(fence->rdev, target_seq, intr, timeout);
+}
+
static const char *radeon_fence_get_driver_name(struct fence *fence)
{
return "radeon";
@@ -932,6 +960,6 @@ static const struct fence_ops radeon_fence_ops = {
.get_timeline_name = radeon_fence_get_timeline_name,
.enable_signaling = radeon_fence_enable_signaling,
.signaled = __radeon_fence_signaled,
- .wait = fence_default_wait,
+ .wait = __radeon_fence_wait,
.release = NULL,
};
--
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