linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdgpu: Make use of drm_wedge_app

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <38b9cc8b-2a55-4815-a19f-f5bdf0f7687c@igalia.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 18:49:43 -0300
From: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
To: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@...el.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-dev@...lia.com, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
 'Christian König' <christian.koenig@....com>,
 siqueira@...lia.com, airlied@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch,
 rodrigo.vivi@...el.com, jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdgpu: Make use of drm_wedge_app_info

Hi Raag,

On 2/28/25 11:58, Raag Jadav wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 09:13:53AM -0300, André Almeida wrote:
>> To notify userspace about which app (if any) made the device get in a
>> wedge state, make use of drm_wedge_app_info parameter, filling it with
>> the app PID and name.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_job.c    |  6 +++++-
>>   2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>> index 00b9b87dafd8..e06adf6f34fd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>> @@ -6123,8 +6123,23 @@ int amdgpu_device_gpu_recover(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>   
>>   	atomic_set(&adev->reset_domain->reset_res, r);
>>   
>> -	if (!r)
>> -		drm_dev_wedged_event(adev_to_drm(adev), DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_NONE, NULL);
>> +	if (!r) {
>> +		struct drm_wedge_app_info aux, *info = NULL;
>> +
>> +		if (job) {
>> +			struct amdgpu_task_info *ti;
>> +
>> +			ti = amdgpu_vm_get_task_info_pasid(adev, job->pasid);
>> +			if (ti) {
>> +				aux.pid = ti->pid;
>> +				aux.comm = ti->process_name;
>> +				info = &aux;
>> +				amdgpu_vm_put_task_info(ti);
>> +			}
>> +		}
> Is this guaranteed to be guilty app and not some scheduled worker?

This is how amdgpu decides which app is the guilty one earlier in the 
code as in the print:

     ti = amdgpu_vm_get_task_info_pasid(ring->adev, job->pasid);

     "Process information: process %s pid %d thread %s pid %d\n"

So I think it's consistent with what the driver thinks it's the guilty 
process.

> Raag
>