linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] drm/amdgpu: Rework coredump to use memory dynamically

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 17 Aug 2023 17:04:04 +0200
From:   Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@....com>
To:     André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
Cc:     pierre-eric.pelloux-prayer@....com, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        'Marek Olšák' <maraeo@...il.com>,
        Timur Kristóf <timur.kristof@...il.com>,
        Samuel Pitoiset <samuel.pitoiset@...il.com>,
        kernel-dev@...lia.com, alexander.deucher@....com,
        christian.koenig@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] drm/amdgpu: Rework coredump to use memory
 dynamically


On 17/08/2023 15:45, André Almeida wrote:
> Hi Shashank,
>
> Em 17/08/2023 03:41, Shashank Sharma escreveu:
>> Hello Andre,
>>
>> On 15/08/2023 21:50, André Almeida wrote:
>>> Instead of storing coredump information inside amdgpu_device struct,
>>> move if to a proper separated struct and allocate it dynamically. This
>>> will make it easier to further expand the logged information.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
>>> ---
>>> v4: change kmalloc to kzalloc
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h        | 14 +++--
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 63 
>>> ++++++++++++++--------
>>>   2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h 
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>>> index 9c6a332261ab..0d560b713948 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>>> @@ -1088,11 +1088,6 @@ struct amdgpu_device {
>>>       uint32_t                        *reset_dump_reg_list;
>>>       uint32_t            *reset_dump_reg_value;
>>>       int                             num_regs;
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP
>>> -    struct amdgpu_task_info         reset_task_info;
>>> -    bool                            reset_vram_lost;
>>> -    struct timespec64               reset_time;
>>> -#endif
>>>       bool                            scpm_enabled;
>>>       uint32_t                        scpm_status;
>>> @@ -1105,6 +1100,15 @@ struct amdgpu_device {
>>>       uint32_t            aid_mask;
>>>   };
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP
>>> +struct amdgpu_coredump_info {
>>> +    struct amdgpu_device        *adev;
>>> +    struct amdgpu_task_info         reset_task_info;
>>> +    struct timespec64               reset_time;
>>> +    bool                            reset_vram_lost;
>>> +};
>>
>> The patch looks good to me in general, but I would recommend slightly 
>> different arrangement and segregation of GPU reset information.
>>
>> Please consider a higher level structure adev->gpu_reset_info, and 
>> move everything related to reset dump info into that, including this 
>> new coredump_info structure, something like this:
>>
>> struct amdgpu_reset_info {
>>
>>      uint32_t *reset_dump_reg_list;
>>
>>      uint32_t *reset_dump_reg_value;
>>
>>      int num_regs;
>>
>
> Right, I can encapsulate there reset_dump members,
>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP
>>
>>     struct amdgpu_coredump_info *coredump_info;/* keep this dynamic 
>> allocation */
>
> but we don't need a pointer for amdgpu_coredump_info inside 
> amdgpu_device or inside of amdgpu_device->gpu_reset_info, right?

I think it would be better if we keep all of the GPU reset related data 
in the same structure, so adev->gpu_reset_info->coredump_info sounds 
about right to me.

- Shashank

>
>>
>> #endif
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>> This will make sure that all the relevant information is at the same 
>> place.
>>
>> - Shashank
>>
>        amdgpu_inc_vram_lost(tmp_adev);