lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/3] drm/panfrost: Add initial panfrost driver
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 23:04, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 7:30 AM Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 01/04/2019 08:47, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > This adds the initial driver for panfrost which supports Arm Mali
> > > Midgard and Bifrost family of GPUs. Currently, only the T860 and
> > > T760 Midgard GPUs have been tested.
>
> [...]
> > > +
> > > + if (status & JOB_INT_MASK_ERR(j)) {
> > > + job_write(pfdev, JS_COMMAND_NEXT(j), JS_COMMAND_NOP);
> > > + job_write(pfdev, JS_COMMAND(j), JS_COMMAND_HARD_STOP_0);
> >
> > Hard-stopping an already completed job isn't likely to do very much :)
> > Also you are using the "_0" version which is only valid when "job chain
> > disambiguation" is present.

Yeah, guess that can be removed.

> > I suspect in this case you should also be signalling the fence? At the
> > moment you rely on the GPU timeout recovering from the fault.
>
> I'll defer to Tomeu who wrote this (IIRC).

Yes, that would be an improvement.

> > One issue that I haven't got to the bottom of is that I can trigger a
> > lockdep splat:
> >
> > -----8<------
> > panfrost ffa30000.gpu: js fault, js=1, status=JOB_CONFIG_FAULT,
> > head=0x0, tail=0x0
> > root@debian:~/ddk_panfrost# panfrost ffa30000.gpu: gpu sched timeout,
> > js=1, status=0x40, head=0x0, tail=0x0, sched_job=12a94ba6
> >
> > ======================================================
> > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > 5.0.0+ #32 Not tainted
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > kworker/1:0/608 is trying to acquire lock:
> > 89b1e2d8 (&(&js->job_lock)->rlock){-.-.}, at:
> > dma_fence_remove_callback+0x14/0x50
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > a887e4b2 (&(&sched->job_list_lock)->rlock){-.-.}, at:
> > drm_sched_stop+0x24/0x10c
> >
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >
> >
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> >
> > -> #1 (&(&sched->job_list_lock)->rlock){-.-.}:
> > drm_sched_process_job+0x60/0x208
> > dma_fence_signal+0x1dc/0x1fc
> > panfrost_job_irq_handler+0x160/0x194
> > __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x80/0x388
> > handle_irq_event_percpu+0x24/0x78
> > handle_irq_event+0x38/0x5c
> > handle_fasteoi_irq+0xb4/0x128
> > generic_handle_irq+0x18/0x28
> > __handle_domain_irq+0xa0/0xb4
> > gic_handle_irq+0x4c/0x78
> > __irq_svc+0x70/0x98
> > arch_cpu_idle+0x20/0x3c
> > arch_cpu_idle+0x20/0x3c
> > do_idle+0x11c/0x22c
> > cpu_startup_entry+0x18/0x20
> > start_kernel+0x398/0x420
> >
> > -> #0 (&(&js->job_lock)->rlock){-.-.}:
> > _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x50/0x64
> > dma_fence_remove_callback+0x14/0x50
> > drm_sched_stop+0x5c/0x10c
> > panfrost_job_timedout+0xd0/0x180
> > drm_sched_job_timedout+0x34/0x5c
> > process_one_work+0x2ac/0x6a4
> > worker_thread+0x28c/0x3fc
> > kthread+0x13c/0x158
> > ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20
> > (null)
> >
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > ---- ----
> > lock(&(&sched->job_list_lock)->rlock);
> > lock(&(&js->job_lock)->rlock);
> > lock(&(&sched->job_list_lock)->rlock);
> > lock(&(&js->job_lock)->rlock);
> >
> > *** DEADLOCK ***
> >
> > 3 locks held by kworker/1:0/608:
> > #0: 9b350627 ((wq_completion)"events"){+.+.}, at:
> > process_one_work+0x1f8/0x6a4
> > #1: a802aa2d ((work_completion)(&(&sched->work_tdr)->work)){+.+.}, at:
> > process_one_work+0x1f8/0x6a4
> > #2: a887e4b2 (&(&sched->job_list_lock)->rlock){-.-.}, at:
> > drm_sched_stop+0x24/0x10c
> >
> > stack backtrace:
> > CPU: 1 PID: 608 Comm: kworker/1:0 Not tainted 5.0.0+ #32
> > Hardware name: Rockchip (Device Tree)
> > Workqueue: events drm_sched_job_timedout
> > [<c0111088>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c9a8>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> > [<c010c9a8>] (show_stack) from [<c0773df4>] (dump_stack+0x9c/0xd4)
> > [<c0773df4>] (dump_stack) from [<c016d034>]
> > (print_circular_bug.constprop.15+0x1fc/0x2cc)
> > [<c016d034>] (print_circular_bug.constprop.15) from [<c016f6c0>]
> > (__lock_acquire+0xe5c/0x167c)
> > [<c016f6c0>] (__lock_acquire) from [<c0170828>] (lock_acquire+0xc4/0x210)
> > [<c0170828>] (lock_acquire) from [<c07920e0>]
> > (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x50/0x64)
> > [<c07920e0>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave) from [<c0516784>]
> > (dma_fence_remove_callback+0x14/0x50)
> > [<c0516784>] (dma_fence_remove_callback) from [<c04def38>]
> > (drm_sched_stop+0x5c/0x10c)
> > [<c04def38>] (drm_sched_stop) from [<c04ec80c>]
> > (panfrost_job_timedout+0xd0/0x180)
> > [<c04ec80c>] (panfrost_job_timedout) from [<c04df340>]
> > (drm_sched_job_timedout+0x34/0x5c)
> > [<c04df340>] (drm_sched_job_timedout) from [<c013ec70>]
> > (process_one_work+0x2ac/0x6a4)
> > [<c013ec70>] (process_one_work) from [<c013fe48>]
> > (worker_thread+0x28c/0x3fc)
> > [<c013fe48>] (worker_thread) from [<c01452a0>] (kthread+0x13c/0x158)
> > [<c01452a0>] (kthread) from [<c01010b4>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20)
> > Exception stack(0xeebd7fb0 to 0xeebd7ff8)
> > 7fa0: 00000000 00000000 00000000
> > 00000000
> > 7fc0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
> > 00000000
> > 7fe0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000013 00000000
> > ----8<----
> >
> > This is with the below simple reproducer:
> >
> > ----8<----
> > #include <sys/ioctl.h>
> > #include <fcntl.h>
> > #include <stdio.h>
> >
> > #include <libdrm/drm.h>
> > #include "panfrost_drm.h"
> >
> > int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > {
> > int fd;
> >
> > if (argc == 2)
> > fd = open(argv[1], O_RDWR);
> > else
> > fd = open("/dev/dri/renderD128", O_RDWR);
> > if (fd == -1) {
> > perror("Failed to open");
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > struct drm_panfrost_submit submit = {
> > .jc = 0,
> > };
> > return ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_PANFROST_SUBMIT, &submit);
> > }
> > ----8<----
> >
> > Any ideas? I'm not an expert on DRM, so I got somewhat lost!
>
> Tomeu?

Ran out of time today, but will be able to look at it tomorrow.

Thanks!

Tomeu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-09 17:57    [W:0.227 / U:51.856 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site