| Message ID | 20230615211542.963700-1-zhanjun.dong@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v3] drm/i915: Avoid circular locking dependency when flush delayed work on gt reset | expand |
V3 is to follow John's suggestion option 1. The better option is in discussion and might have boarder impact. Meanwhile we can start with option 1, check CI system report and see if issue getting better. Regards, Zhanjun Dong On 2023-06-15 5:15 p.m., Zhanjun Dong wrote: > This attempts to avoid circular locking dependency between flush delayed work and intel_gt_reset. > Switched from cancel_delayed_work_sync to cancel_delayed_work, the non-sync version for reset path, it is safe as the worker has the trylock code to handle the lock; Meanwhile keep the sync version for park/fini to ensure the worker is not still running during suspend or shutdown. > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected > 6.4.0-rc1-drmtip_1340-g31e3463b0edb+ #1 Not tainted > ------------------------------------------------------ > kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415 is trying to acquire lock: > ffff88813e6cc640 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __flush_work+0x42/0x530 > > but task is already holding lock: > ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: > > -> #3 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > i915_gem_shrinker_taints_mutex+0x31/0x50 [i915] > intel_gt_init_reset+0x65/0x80 [i915] > intel_gt_common_init_early+0xe1/0x170 [i915] > intel_root_gt_init_early+0x48/0x60 [i915] > i915_driver_probe+0x671/0xcb0 [i915] > i915_pci_probe+0xdc/0x210 [i915] > pci_device_probe+0x95/0x120 > really_probe+0x164/0x3c0 > __driver_probe_device+0x73/0x160 > driver_probe_device+0x19/0xa0 > __driver_attach+0xb6/0x180 > bus_for_each_dev+0x77/0xd0 > bus_add_driver+0x114/0x210 > driver_register+0x5b/0x110 > __pfx_vgem_open+0x3/0x10 [vgem] > do_one_initcall+0x57/0x270 > do_init_module+0x5f/0x220 > load_module+0x1ca4/0x1f00 > __do_sys_finit_module+0xb4/0x130 > do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > -> #2 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > fs_reclaim_acquire+0xac/0xe0 > kmem_cache_alloc+0x32/0x260 > i915_vma_instance+0xb2/0xc60 [i915] > i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww+0x175/0x370 [i915] > vm_fault_gtt+0x22d/0xf60 [i915] > __do_fault+0x2f/0x1d0 > do_pte_missing+0x4a/0xd20 > __handle_mm_fault+0x5b0/0x790 > handle_mm_fault+0xa2/0x230 > do_user_addr_fault+0x3ea/0xa10 > exc_page_fault+0x68/0x1a0 > asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 > > -> #1 (>->reset.backoff_srcu){++++}-{0:0}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > _intel_gt_reset_lock+0x57/0x330 [i915] > guc_timestamp_ping+0x35/0x130 [i915] > process_one_work+0x250/0x510 > worker_thread+0x4f/0x3a0 > kthread+0xff/0x130 > ret_from_fork+0x29/0x50 > > -> #0 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: > check_prev_add+0x90/0xc60 > __lock_acquire+0x1998/0x2590 > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > __flush_work+0x74/0x530 > __cancel_work_timer+0x14f/0x1f0 > intel_guc_submission_reset_prepare+0x81/0x4b0 [i915] > intel_uc_reset_prepare+0x9c/0x120 [i915] > reset_prepare+0x21/0x60 [i915] > intel_gt_reset+0x1dd/0x470 [i915] > intel_gt_reset_global+0xfb/0x170 [i915] > intel_gt_handle_error+0x368/0x420 [i915] > intel_gt_debugfs_reset_store+0x5c/0xc0 [i915] > i915_wedged_set+0x29/0x40 [i915] > simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0xb4/0x110 > full_proxy_write+0x52/0x80 > vfs_write+0xc5/0x4f0 > ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 > do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > other info that might help us debug this: > Chain exists of: > (work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work) --> fs_reclaim --> >->reset.mutex > Possible unsafe locking scenario: > CPU0 CPU1 > ---- ---- > lock(>->reset.mutex); > lock(fs_reclaim); > lock(>->reset.mutex); > lock((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)); > > *** DEADLOCK *** > 3 locks held by kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415: > #0: ffff888101541430 (sb_writers#15){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 > #1: ffff888136c7eab8 (&attr->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0x47/0x110 > #2: ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] > > v2: Add sync flag to guc_cancel_busyness_worker to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. > v3: Add sync flag to intel_guc_submission_disable to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. > > Signed-off-by: Zhanjun Dong <zhanjun.dong@intel.com> > --- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 17 ++++++++++------- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h | 2 +- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 4 ++-- > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > index a0e3ef1c65d2..ef4300246ce1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > @@ -1357,9 +1357,12 @@ static void guc_enable_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) > mod_delayed_work(system_highpri_wq, &guc->timestamp.work, guc->timestamp.ping_delay); > } > > -static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) > +static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) > { > - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); > + if (sync) > + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); > + else > + cancel_delayed_work(&guc->timestamp.work); > } > > static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > @@ -1370,7 +1373,7 @@ static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > unsigned long flags; > ktime_t unused; > > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, false); > > spin_lock_irqsave(&guc->timestamp.lock, flags); > > @@ -1485,7 +1488,7 @@ static int guc_init_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > > static void guc_fini_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > { > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); > } > > void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) > @@ -1500,7 +1503,7 @@ void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) > * and causes an unclaimed register access warning. Cancel the worker > * synchronously here. > */ > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); > > /* > * Before parking, we should sample engine busyness stats if we need to. > @@ -4501,9 +4504,9 @@ int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc) > } > > /* Note: By the time we're here, GuC may have already been reset */ > -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc) > +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) > { > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, sync); > > /* Semaphore interrupt disable and route to host */ > guc_route_semaphores(guc, false); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > index c57b29cdb1a6..a77de0d6ed58 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct intel_engine_cs; > void intel_guc_submission_init_early(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_submission_init(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc); > -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc); > +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync); > void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_preempt_work_create(struct intel_guc *guc); > void intel_guc_preempt_work_destroy(struct intel_guc *guc); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > index 18250fb64bd8..edf13f89830e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > @@ -566,7 +566,7 @@ static int __uc_init_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) > * We've failed to load the firmware :( > */ > err_submission: > - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); > + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, true); > err_log_capture: > __uc_capture_load_err_log(uc); > err_rps: > @@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ static void __uc_fini_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) > return; > > if (intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(uc)) > - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); > + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, false); > > __uc_sanitize(uc); > }
Hi, On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 02:15:42PM -0700, Zhanjun Dong wrote: > This attempts to avoid circular locking dependency between flush delayed work and intel_gt_reset. > Switched from cancel_delayed_work_sync to cancel_delayed_work, the non-sync version for reset path, it is safe as the worker has the trylock code to handle the lock; Meanwhile keep the sync version for park/fini to ensure the worker is not still running during suspend or shutdown. > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected > 6.4.0-rc1-drmtip_1340-g31e3463b0edb+ #1 Not tainted > ------------------------------------------------------ > kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415 is trying to acquire lock: > ffff88813e6cc640 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __flush_work+0x42/0x530 > > but task is already holding lock: > ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: > > -> #3 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > i915_gem_shrinker_taints_mutex+0x31/0x50 [i915] > intel_gt_init_reset+0x65/0x80 [i915] > intel_gt_common_init_early+0xe1/0x170 [i915] > intel_root_gt_init_early+0x48/0x60 [i915] > i915_driver_probe+0x671/0xcb0 [i915] > i915_pci_probe+0xdc/0x210 [i915] > pci_device_probe+0x95/0x120 > really_probe+0x164/0x3c0 > __driver_probe_device+0x73/0x160 > driver_probe_device+0x19/0xa0 > __driver_attach+0xb6/0x180 > bus_for_each_dev+0x77/0xd0 > bus_add_driver+0x114/0x210 > driver_register+0x5b/0x110 > __pfx_vgem_open+0x3/0x10 [vgem] > do_one_initcall+0x57/0x270 > do_init_module+0x5f/0x220 > load_module+0x1ca4/0x1f00 > __do_sys_finit_module+0xb4/0x130 > do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > -> #2 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > fs_reclaim_acquire+0xac/0xe0 > kmem_cache_alloc+0x32/0x260 > i915_vma_instance+0xb2/0xc60 [i915] > i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww+0x175/0x370 [i915] > vm_fault_gtt+0x22d/0xf60 [i915] > __do_fault+0x2f/0x1d0 > do_pte_missing+0x4a/0xd20 > __handle_mm_fault+0x5b0/0x790 > handle_mm_fault+0xa2/0x230 > do_user_addr_fault+0x3ea/0xa10 > exc_page_fault+0x68/0x1a0 > asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 > > -> #1 (>->reset.backoff_srcu){++++}-{0:0}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > _intel_gt_reset_lock+0x57/0x330 [i915] > guc_timestamp_ping+0x35/0x130 [i915] > process_one_work+0x250/0x510 > worker_thread+0x4f/0x3a0 > kthread+0xff/0x130 > ret_from_fork+0x29/0x50 > > -> #0 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: > check_prev_add+0x90/0xc60 > __lock_acquire+0x1998/0x2590 > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > __flush_work+0x74/0x530 > __cancel_work_timer+0x14f/0x1f0 > intel_guc_submission_reset_prepare+0x81/0x4b0 [i915] > intel_uc_reset_prepare+0x9c/0x120 [i915] > reset_prepare+0x21/0x60 [i915] > intel_gt_reset+0x1dd/0x470 [i915] > intel_gt_reset_global+0xfb/0x170 [i915] > intel_gt_handle_error+0x368/0x420 [i915] > intel_gt_debugfs_reset_store+0x5c/0xc0 [i915] > i915_wedged_set+0x29/0x40 [i915] > simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0xb4/0x110 > full_proxy_write+0x52/0x80 > vfs_write+0xc5/0x4f0 > ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 > do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > other info that might help us debug this: > Chain exists of: > (work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work) --> fs_reclaim --> >->reset.mutex > Possible unsafe locking scenario: > CPU0 CPU1 > ---- ---- > lock(>->reset.mutex); > lock(fs_reclaim); > lock(>->reset.mutex); > lock((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)); > > *** DEADLOCK *** > 3 locks held by kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415: > #0: ffff888101541430 (sb_writers#15){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 > #1: ffff888136c7eab8 (&attr->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0x47/0x110 > #2: ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] > > v2: Add sync flag to guc_cancel_busyness_worker to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. > v3: Add sync flag to intel_guc_submission_disable to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. > > Signed-off-by: Zhanjun Dong <zhanjun.dong@intel.com> Acked-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com> Any further comment on this? Andi > --- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 17 ++++++++++------- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h | 2 +- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 4 ++-- > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > index a0e3ef1c65d2..ef4300246ce1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > @@ -1357,9 +1357,12 @@ static void guc_enable_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) > mod_delayed_work(system_highpri_wq, &guc->timestamp.work, guc->timestamp.ping_delay); > } > > -static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) > +static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) > { > - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); > + if (sync) > + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); > + else > + cancel_delayed_work(&guc->timestamp.work); > } > > static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > @@ -1370,7 +1373,7 @@ static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > unsigned long flags; > ktime_t unused; > > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, false); > > spin_lock_irqsave(&guc->timestamp.lock, flags); > > @@ -1485,7 +1488,7 @@ static int guc_init_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > > static void guc_fini_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > { > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); > } > > void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) > @@ -1500,7 +1503,7 @@ void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) > * and causes an unclaimed register access warning. Cancel the worker > * synchronously here. > */ > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); > > /* > * Before parking, we should sample engine busyness stats if we need to. > @@ -4501,9 +4504,9 @@ int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc) > } > > /* Note: By the time we're here, GuC may have already been reset */ > -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc) > +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) > { > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, sync); > > /* Semaphore interrupt disable and route to host */ > guc_route_semaphores(guc, false); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > index c57b29cdb1a6..a77de0d6ed58 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct intel_engine_cs; > void intel_guc_submission_init_early(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_submission_init(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc); > -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc); > +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync); > void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_preempt_work_create(struct intel_guc *guc); > void intel_guc_preempt_work_destroy(struct intel_guc *guc); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > index 18250fb64bd8..edf13f89830e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > @@ -566,7 +566,7 @@ static int __uc_init_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) > * We've failed to load the firmware :( > */ > err_submission: > - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); > + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, true); > err_log_capture: > __uc_capture_load_err_log(uc); > err_rps: > @@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ static void __uc_fini_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) > return; > > if (intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(uc)) > - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); > + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, false); > > __uc_sanitize(uc); > } > -- > 2.34.1
On 6/15/2023 14:15, Zhanjun Dong wrote: > This attempts to avoid circular locking dependency between flush delayed work and intel_gt_reset. > Switched from cancel_delayed_work_sync to cancel_delayed_work, the non-sync version for reset path, it is safe as the worker has the trylock code to handle the lock; Meanwhile keep the sync version for park/fini to ensure the worker is not still running during suspend or shutdown. > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected > 6.4.0-rc1-drmtip_1340-g31e3463b0edb+ #1 Not tainted > ------------------------------------------------------ > kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415 is trying to acquire lock: > ffff88813e6cc640 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __flush_work+0x42/0x530 > > but task is already holding lock: > ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] > > which lock already depends on the new lock. > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: > > -> #3 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > i915_gem_shrinker_taints_mutex+0x31/0x50 [i915] > intel_gt_init_reset+0x65/0x80 [i915] > intel_gt_common_init_early+0xe1/0x170 [i915] > intel_root_gt_init_early+0x48/0x60 [i915] > i915_driver_probe+0x671/0xcb0 [i915] > i915_pci_probe+0xdc/0x210 [i915] > pci_device_probe+0x95/0x120 > really_probe+0x164/0x3c0 > __driver_probe_device+0x73/0x160 > driver_probe_device+0x19/0xa0 > __driver_attach+0xb6/0x180 > bus_for_each_dev+0x77/0xd0 > bus_add_driver+0x114/0x210 > driver_register+0x5b/0x110 > __pfx_vgem_open+0x3/0x10 [vgem] > do_one_initcall+0x57/0x270 > do_init_module+0x5f/0x220 > load_module+0x1ca4/0x1f00 > __do_sys_finit_module+0xb4/0x130 > do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > -> #2 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > fs_reclaim_acquire+0xac/0xe0 > kmem_cache_alloc+0x32/0x260 > i915_vma_instance+0xb2/0xc60 [i915] > i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww+0x175/0x370 [i915] > vm_fault_gtt+0x22d/0xf60 [i915] > __do_fault+0x2f/0x1d0 > do_pte_missing+0x4a/0xd20 > __handle_mm_fault+0x5b0/0x790 > handle_mm_fault+0xa2/0x230 > do_user_addr_fault+0x3ea/0xa10 > exc_page_fault+0x68/0x1a0 > asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 > > -> #1 (>->reset.backoff_srcu){++++}-{0:0}: > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > _intel_gt_reset_lock+0x57/0x330 [i915] > guc_timestamp_ping+0x35/0x130 [i915] > process_one_work+0x250/0x510 > worker_thread+0x4f/0x3a0 > kthread+0xff/0x130 > ret_from_fork+0x29/0x50 > > -> #0 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: > check_prev_add+0x90/0xc60 > __lock_acquire+0x1998/0x2590 > lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 > __flush_work+0x74/0x530 > __cancel_work_timer+0x14f/0x1f0 > intel_guc_submission_reset_prepare+0x81/0x4b0 [i915] > intel_uc_reset_prepare+0x9c/0x120 [i915] > reset_prepare+0x21/0x60 [i915] > intel_gt_reset+0x1dd/0x470 [i915] > intel_gt_reset_global+0xfb/0x170 [i915] > intel_gt_handle_error+0x368/0x420 [i915] > intel_gt_debugfs_reset_store+0x5c/0xc0 [i915] > i915_wedged_set+0x29/0x40 [i915] > simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0xb4/0x110 > full_proxy_write+0x52/0x80 > vfs_write+0xc5/0x4f0 > ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 > do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc > > other info that might help us debug this: > Chain exists of: > (work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work) --> fs_reclaim --> >->reset.mutex > Possible unsafe locking scenario: > CPU0 CPU1 > ---- ---- > lock(>->reset.mutex); > lock(fs_reclaim); > lock(>->reset.mutex); > lock((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)); > > *** DEADLOCK *** > 3 locks held by kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415: > #0: ffff888101541430 (sb_writers#15){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 > #1: ffff888136c7eab8 (&attr->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0x47/0x110 > #2: ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] > > v2: Add sync flag to guc_cancel_busyness_worker to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. > v3: Add sync flag to intel_guc_submission_disable to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. > > Signed-off-by: Zhanjun Dong <zhanjun.dong@intel.com> > --- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 17 ++++++++++------- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h | 2 +- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 4 ++-- > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > index a0e3ef1c65d2..ef4300246ce1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c > @@ -1357,9 +1357,12 @@ static void guc_enable_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) > mod_delayed_work(system_highpri_wq, &guc->timestamp.work, guc->timestamp.ping_delay); > } > > -static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) > +static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) > { > - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); > + if (sync) > + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); > + else > + cancel_delayed_work(&guc->timestamp.work); > } > > static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > @@ -1370,7 +1373,7 @@ static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > unsigned long flags; > ktime_t unused; > > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, false); > > spin_lock_irqsave(&guc->timestamp.lock, flags); > > @@ -1485,7 +1488,7 @@ static int guc_init_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > > static void guc_fini_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) > { > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); > } > > void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) > @@ -1500,7 +1503,7 @@ void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) > * and causes an unclaimed register access warning. Cancel the worker > * synchronously here. > */ > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); > > /* > * Before parking, we should sample engine busyness stats if we need to. > @@ -4501,9 +4504,9 @@ int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc) > } > > /* Note: By the time we're here, GuC may have already been reset */ > -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc) > +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) > { > - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); > + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, sync); > > /* Semaphore interrupt disable and route to host */ > guc_route_semaphores(guc, false); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > index c57b29cdb1a6..a77de0d6ed58 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct intel_engine_cs; > void intel_guc_submission_init_early(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_submission_init(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc); > -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc); > +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync); > void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc); > int intel_guc_preempt_work_create(struct intel_guc *guc); > void intel_guc_preempt_work_destroy(struct intel_guc *guc); > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > index 18250fb64bd8..edf13f89830e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c > @@ -566,7 +566,7 @@ static int __uc_init_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) > * We've failed to load the firmware :( > */ > err_submission: > - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); > + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, true); > err_log_capture: > __uc_capture_load_err_log(uc); > err_rps: > @@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ static void __uc_fini_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) > return; > > if (intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(uc)) > - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); > + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, false); This one is potentially a problem. AFAICT, '__uc_fini_hw' is actually becomes 'intel_uc_fini_hw' (through the magick of UC macro-ised function declarations!). And that is only called from the bail out error path of GT init and the driver remove path. Both of those should be synchronous waits to ensure that the worker is guaranteed gone before unloading the driver. However, the GT init path is presumably called as part of a full GT reset. And in theory, it could fail (e.g. because the hardware is toast and hence the reset in the first place). And in that case, it needs to be the async cancel. One option would be to pass a 'in reset' flag all the way through the GT init path, but that sounds really intrusive and messy. The simpler alternative would be to make this always synchronous and just accept that the circular locking warning may occur in exceedingly rare cases. Again, the circular lock detection is bogus because we have the early exit in the case of a locked mutex. So it is not an actual problem. In which case, living with the warning in the super rare case of a failed GT reset seems acceptable to me. John. > > __uc_sanitize(uc); > }
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c index a0e3ef1c65d2..ef4300246ce1 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c @@ -1357,9 +1357,12 @@ static void guc_enable_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) mod_delayed_work(system_highpri_wq, &guc->timestamp.work, guc->timestamp.ping_delay); } -static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc) +static void guc_cancel_busyness_worker(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) { - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); + if (sync) + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&guc->timestamp.work); + else + cancel_delayed_work(&guc->timestamp.work); } static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) @@ -1370,7 +1373,7 @@ static void __reset_guc_busyness_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) unsigned long flags; ktime_t unused; - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, false); spin_lock_irqsave(&guc->timestamp.lock, flags); @@ -1485,7 +1488,7 @@ static int guc_init_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) static void guc_fini_engine_stats(struct intel_guc *guc) { - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); } void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) @@ -1500,7 +1503,7 @@ void intel_guc_busyness_park(struct intel_gt *gt) * and causes an unclaimed register access warning. Cancel the worker * synchronously here. */ - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, true); /* * Before parking, we should sample engine busyness stats if we need to. @@ -4501,9 +4504,9 @@ int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc) } /* Note: By the time we're here, GuC may have already been reset */ -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc) +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync) { - guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc); + guc_cancel_busyness_worker(guc, sync); /* Semaphore interrupt disable and route to host */ guc_route_semaphores(guc, false); diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h index c57b29cdb1a6..a77de0d6ed58 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct intel_engine_cs; void intel_guc_submission_init_early(struct intel_guc *guc); int intel_guc_submission_init(struct intel_guc *guc); int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc); -void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc); +void intel_guc_submission_disable(struct intel_guc *guc, bool sync); void intel_guc_submission_fini(struct intel_guc *guc); int intel_guc_preempt_work_create(struct intel_guc *guc); void intel_guc_preempt_work_destroy(struct intel_guc *guc); diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c index 18250fb64bd8..edf13f89830e 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c @@ -566,7 +566,7 @@ static int __uc_init_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) * We've failed to load the firmware :( */ err_submission: - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, true); err_log_capture: __uc_capture_load_err_log(uc); err_rps: @@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ static void __uc_fini_hw(struct intel_uc *uc) return; if (intel_uc_uses_guc_submission(uc)) - intel_guc_submission_disable(guc); + intel_guc_submission_disable(guc, false); __uc_sanitize(uc); }
This attempts to avoid circular locking dependency between flush delayed work and intel_gt_reset. Switched from cancel_delayed_work_sync to cancel_delayed_work, the non-sync version for reset path, it is safe as the worker has the trylock code to handle the lock; Meanwhile keep the sync version for park/fini to ensure the worker is not still running during suspend or shutdown. WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.4.0-rc1-drmtip_1340-g31e3463b0edb+ #1 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415 is trying to acquire lock: ffff88813e6cc640 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __flush_work+0x42/0x530 but task is already holding lock: ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #3 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 i915_gem_shrinker_taints_mutex+0x31/0x50 [i915] intel_gt_init_reset+0x65/0x80 [i915] intel_gt_common_init_early+0xe1/0x170 [i915] intel_root_gt_init_early+0x48/0x60 [i915] i915_driver_probe+0x671/0xcb0 [i915] i915_pci_probe+0xdc/0x210 [i915] pci_device_probe+0x95/0x120 really_probe+0x164/0x3c0 __driver_probe_device+0x73/0x160 driver_probe_device+0x19/0xa0 __driver_attach+0xb6/0x180 bus_for_each_dev+0x77/0xd0 bus_add_driver+0x114/0x210 driver_register+0x5b/0x110 __pfx_vgem_open+0x3/0x10 [vgem] do_one_initcall+0x57/0x270 do_init_module+0x5f/0x220 load_module+0x1ca4/0x1f00 __do_sys_finit_module+0xb4/0x130 do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc -> #2 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}: lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 fs_reclaim_acquire+0xac/0xe0 kmem_cache_alloc+0x32/0x260 i915_vma_instance+0xb2/0xc60 [i915] i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin_ww+0x175/0x370 [i915] vm_fault_gtt+0x22d/0xf60 [i915] __do_fault+0x2f/0x1d0 do_pte_missing+0x4a/0xd20 __handle_mm_fault+0x5b0/0x790 handle_mm_fault+0xa2/0x230 do_user_addr_fault+0x3ea/0xa10 exc_page_fault+0x68/0x1a0 asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 -> #1 (>->reset.backoff_srcu){++++}-{0:0}: lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 _intel_gt_reset_lock+0x57/0x330 [i915] guc_timestamp_ping+0x35/0x130 [i915] process_one_work+0x250/0x510 worker_thread+0x4f/0x3a0 kthread+0xff/0x130 ret_from_fork+0x29/0x50 -> #0 ((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: check_prev_add+0x90/0xc60 __lock_acquire+0x1998/0x2590 lock_acquire+0xd8/0x2d0 __flush_work+0x74/0x530 __cancel_work_timer+0x14f/0x1f0 intel_guc_submission_reset_prepare+0x81/0x4b0 [i915] intel_uc_reset_prepare+0x9c/0x120 [i915] reset_prepare+0x21/0x60 [i915] intel_gt_reset+0x1dd/0x470 [i915] intel_gt_reset_global+0xfb/0x170 [i915] intel_gt_handle_error+0x368/0x420 [i915] intel_gt_debugfs_reset_store+0x5c/0xc0 [i915] i915_wedged_set+0x29/0x40 [i915] simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0xb4/0x110 full_proxy_write+0x52/0x80 vfs_write+0xc5/0x4f0 ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x3c/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x72/0xdc other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: (work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work) --> fs_reclaim --> >->reset.mutex Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(>->reset.mutex); lock(fs_reclaim); lock(>->reset.mutex); lock((work_completion)(&(&guc->timestamp.work)->work)); *** DEADLOCK *** 3 locks held by kms_pipe_crc_ba/6415: #0: ffff888101541430 (sb_writers#15){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x64/0xe0 #1: ffff888136c7eab8 (&attr->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: simple_attr_write_xsigned.constprop.0+0x47/0x110 #2: ffff88813e6cce90 (>->reset.mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: intel_gt_reset+0x19e/0x470 [i915] v2: Add sync flag to guc_cancel_busyness_worker to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. v3: Add sync flag to intel_guc_submission_disable to ensure reset path calls asynchronous cancel. Signed-off-by: Zhanjun Dong <zhanjun.dong@intel.com> --- .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 17 ++++++++++------- .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_uc.c | 4 ++-- 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)