On 2025-06-06 7:28 am, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/accel/rocket/rocket_device.h b/drivers/accel/rocket/rocket_device.h
index 10acfe8534f00a7985d40a93f4b2f7f69d43caee..50e46f0516bd1615b5f826c5002a6c0ecbf9aed4 100644
--- a/drivers/accel/rocket/rocket_device.h
+++ b/drivers/accel/rocket/rocket_device.h
@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@
struct rocket_device {
struct drm_device ddev;
+ struct mutex sched_lock;
+
struct mutex iommu_lock;
Just realised I missed this in the last patch, but iommu_lock appears to
be completely unnecessary now.
struct rocket_core *cores;
[...]
+static void rocket_job_hw_submit(struct rocket_core *core, struct rocket_job *job)
+{
+ struct rocket_task *task;
+ bool task_pp_en = 1;
+ bool task_count = 1;
+
+ /* GO ! */
+
+ /* Don't queue the job if a reset is in progress */
+ if (atomic_read(&core->reset.pending))
+ return;
+
+ task = &job->tasks[job->next_task_idx];
+ job->next_task_idx++;
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, BASE_ADDRESS, 0x1);
+
+ rocket_cna_writel(core, S_POINTER, 0xe + 0x10000000 * core->index);
+ rocket_core_writel(core, S_POINTER, 0xe + 0x10000000 * core->index);
Those really look like bitfield operations rather than actual arithmetic
to me.
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, BASE_ADDRESS, task->regcmd);
I don't see how regcmd is created (I guess that's in userspace?), but
given that it's explicitly u64 all the way through - and especially
since you claim to support 40-bit DMA addresses - it definitely seems
suspicious that the upper 32 bits never seem to be consumed anywhere :/
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, REGISTER_AMOUNTS, (task->regcmd_count + 1) / 2 - 1);
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, INTERRUPT_MASK, PC_INTERRUPT_MASK_DPU_0 | PC_INTERRUPT_MASK_DPU_1);
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, INTERRUPT_CLEAR, PC_INTERRUPT_CLEAR_DPU_0 | PC_INTERRUPT_CLEAR_DPU_1);
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, TASK_CON, ((0x6 | task_pp_en) << 12) | task_count);
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, TASK_DMA_BASE_ADDR, 0x0);
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, OPERATION_ENABLE, 0x1);
+
+ dev_dbg(core->dev, "Submitted regcmd at 0x%llx to core %d", task->regcmd, core->index);
+}
[...]
+static struct dma_fence *rocket_job_run(struct drm_sched_job *sched_job)
+{
+ struct rocket_job *job = to_rocket_job(sched_job);
+ struct rocket_device *rdev = job->rdev;
+ struct rocket_core *core = sched_to_core(rdev, sched_job->sched);
+ struct dma_fence *fence = NULL;
+ int ret;
+
+ if (unlikely(job->base.s_fence->finished.error))
+ return NULL;
+
+ /*
+ * Nothing to execute: can happen if the job has finished while
+ * we were resetting the GPU.
GPU? (Similarly in various other comments/prints)
+ */
+ if (job->next_task_idx == job->task_count)
+ return NULL;
+
+ fence = rocket_fence_create(core);
+ if (IS_ERR(fence))
+ return fence;
+
+ if (job->done_fence)
+ dma_fence_put(job->done_fence);
+ job->done_fence = dma_fence_get(fence);
+
+ ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(core->dev);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return fence;
+
+ ret = iommu_attach_group(job->domain, iommu_group_get(core->dev));
I don't see iommu_group_put() anywhere, so you're leaking refcounts all
over.
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return fence;
+
+ scoped_guard(spinlock, &core->job_lock) {
+ core->in_flight_job = job;
+ rocket_job_hw_submit(core, job);
+ }
+
+ return fence;
+}
[...]
+static void rocket_job_handle_irq(struct rocket_core *core)
+{
+ u32 status, raw_status;
+
+ pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(core->dev);
+
+ status = rocket_pc_readl(core, INTERRUPT_STATUS);
+ raw_status = rocket_pc_readl(core, INTERRUPT_RAW_STATUS);
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, OPERATION_ENABLE, 0x0);
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, INTERRUPT_CLEAR, 0x1ffff);
What was the point of reading the status registers if we're just going
to blindly clear every possible condition anyway?
+ scoped_guard(spinlock, &core->job_lock)
+ if (core->in_flight_job)
+ rocket_job_handle_done(core, core->in_flight_job);
But then is it really OK to just start the next task regardless of
whether the current task was reporting successful completion or an error?
+}
+
+static void
+rocket_reset(struct rocket_core *core, struct drm_sched_job *bad)
+{
+ bool cookie;
+
+ if (!atomic_read(&core->reset.pending))
+ return;
+
+ /*
+ * Stop the scheduler.
+ *
+ * FIXME: We temporarily get out of the dma_fence_signalling section
+ * because the cleanup path generate lockdep splats when taking locks
+ * to release job resources. We should rework the code to follow this
+ * pattern:
+ *
+ * try_lock
+ * if (locked)
+ * release
+ * else
+ * schedule_work_to_release_later
+ */
+ drm_sched_stop(&core->sched, bad);
+
+ cookie = dma_fence_begin_signalling();
+
+ if (bad)
+ drm_sched_increase_karma(bad);
+
+ /*
+ * Mask job interrupts and synchronize to make sure we won't be
+ * interrupted during our reset.
+ */
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, INTERRUPT_MASK, 0x0);
+ synchronize_irq(core->irq);
...except it's a shared IRQ, so it can still merrily fire at any time.
+
+ /* Handle the remaining interrupts before we reset. */
+ rocket_job_handle_irq(core);
+
+ /*
+ * Remaining interrupts have been handled, but we might still have
+ * stuck jobs. Let's make sure the PM counters stay balanced by
+ * manually calling pm_runtime_put_noidle() and
+ * rocket_devfreq_record_idle() for each stuck job.
+ * Let's also make sure the cycle counting register's refcnt is
+ * kept balanced to prevent it from running forever
Comments that don't match the code are more confusing than helpful :/
+ */
+ scoped_guard(spinlock, &core->job_lock) {
+ if (core->in_flight_job)
+ pm_runtime_put_noidle(core->dev);
+
+ core->in_flight_job = NULL;
+ }
+
+ /* Proceed with reset now. */
+ pm_runtime_force_suspend(core->dev);
+ pm_runtime_force_resume(core->dev);
Can you guarantee that actually resets the hardware if something else is
holding the power domain open or RPM is disabled? I'm not familiar with
the details of drm_sched, but if there are other jobs queued behind the
stuck one would it even pass the rocket_job_is_idle() check for suspend
to succeed anyway?
Not to mention that you have an actual reset control in the DT binding,
which isn't even optional... :/
+ /* GPU has been reset, we can clear the reset pending bit. */
+ atomic_set(&core->reset.pending, 0);
+
+ /*
+ * Now resubmit jobs that were previously queued but didn't have a
+ * chance to finish.
+ * FIXME: We temporarily get out of the DMA fence signalling section
+ * while resubmitting jobs because the job submission logic will
+ * allocate memory with the GFP_KERNEL flag which can trigger memory
+ * reclaim and exposes a lock ordering issue.
+ */
+ dma_fence_end_signalling(cookie);
+ drm_sched_resubmit_jobs(&core->sched);
Since I happened to look, this says it's deprecated?
+ cookie = dma_fence_begin_signalling();
+
+ /* Restart the scheduler */
+ drm_sched_start(&core->sched, 0);
+
+ dma_fence_end_signalling(cookie);
+}
+
+static enum drm_gpu_sched_stat rocket_job_timedout(struct drm_sched_job *sched_job)
+{
+ struct rocket_job *job = to_rocket_job(sched_job);
+ struct rocket_device *rdev = job->rdev;
+ struct rocket_core *core = sched_to_core(rdev, sched_job->sched);
+
+ /*
+ * If the GPU managed to complete this jobs fence, the timeout is
+ * spurious. Bail out.
+ */
+ if (dma_fence_is_signaled(job->done_fence))
+ return DRM_GPU_SCHED_STAT_NOMINAL;
Do we really need the same return condition twice? What if the IRQ fires
immediately after we've made this check, and is handled without delay
such that sychronize_irq() effectively still does nothing? Either way
we've taken longer than the timeout value to observe the job completing
successfully, and either that's significant and worth warning about or
it's not - I don't see any point in trying to (inaccurately) nitpick
*why* it might have happened.
+ /*
+ * Rocket IRQ handler may take a long time to process an interrupt
+ * if there is another IRQ handler hogging the processing.
+ * For example, the HDMI encoder driver might be stuck in the IRQ
+ * handler for a significant time in a case of bad cable connection.
What have HDMI cables got to do with anything here? Yes, in general IRQ
latency can be high, since CPUs can have IRQs masked and/or be taking
higher-priority interrupts for any number of reasons. I don't see how an
oddly-specific example (of apparently poor driver design, to boot) is
useful.
+ * In order to catch such cases and not report spurious rocket
+ * job timeouts, synchronize the IRQ handler and re-check the fence
+ * status.
+ */
+ synchronize_irq(core->irq);
+
+ if (dma_fence_is_signaled(job->done_fence)) {
+ dev_warn(core->dev, "unexpectedly high interrupt latency\n");
+ return DRM_GPU_SCHED_STAT_NOMINAL;
+ }
+
+ dev_err(core->dev, "gpu sched timeout");
+
+ atomic_set(&core->reset.pending, 1);
+ rocket_reset(core, sched_job);
+ iommu_detach_group(NULL, iommu_group_get(core->dev));
+
+ return DRM_GPU_SCHED_STAT_NOMINAL;
+}
+
+static void rocket_reset_work(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+ struct rocket_core *core;
+
+ core = container_of(work, struct rocket_core, reset.work);
+ rocket_reset(core, NULL);
+}
+
+static const struct drm_sched_backend_ops rocket_sched_ops = {
+ .run_job = rocket_job_run,
+ .timedout_job = rocket_job_timedout,
+ .free_job = rocket_job_free
+};
+
+static irqreturn_t rocket_job_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data)
+{
+ struct rocket_core *core = data;
+
+ rocket_job_handle_irq(core);
+
+ return IRQ_HANDLED;
+}
+
+static irqreturn_t rocket_job_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
+{
+ struct rocket_core *core = data;
+ u32 raw_status = rocket_pc_readl(core, INTERRUPT_RAW_STATUS);
Given that this can be a shared IRQ as above, it would be a good idea to
take care to avoid register accesses while suspended. Especially if
you're trying to utilise suspend to reset a failing job that may well be
throwing IOMMU faults.
+
+ WARN_ON(raw_status & PC_INTERRUPT_RAW_STATUS_DMA_READ_ERROR);
+ WARN_ON(raw_status & PC_INTERRUPT_RAW_STATUS_DMA_READ_ERROR);
+
+ if (!(raw_status & PC_INTERRUPT_RAW_STATUS_DPU_0 ||
+ raw_status & PC_INTERRUPT_RAW_STATUS_DPU_1))
+ return IRQ_NONE;
+
+ rocket_pc_writel(core, INTERRUPT_MASK, 0x0);
+
+ return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD;
+}
+
+int rocket_job_init(struct rocket_core *core)
+{
+ struct drm_sched_init_args args = {
+ .ops = &rocket_sched_ops,
+ .num_rqs = DRM_SCHED_PRIORITY_COUNT,
+ .credit_limit = 1,
Ah, does this mean that all the stuff about queued jobs was in fact all
nonsense anyway?
+ .timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(JOB_TIMEOUT_MS),
+ .name = dev_name(core->dev),
+ .dev = core->dev,
+ };
+ int ret;
+
+ INIT_WORK(&core->reset.work, rocket_reset_work);
+ spin_lock_init(&core->job_lock);
+
+ core->irq = platform_get_irq(to_platform_device(core->dev), 0);
+ if (core->irq < 0)
+ return core->irq;
+
+ ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(core->dev, core->irq,
+ rocket_job_irq_handler,
+ rocket_job_irq_handler_thread,
+ IRQF_SHARED, KBUILD_MODNAME "-job",
Is it really a "job" interrupt though? The binding and the register
definitions suggest it's just a general status interrupt for the core.
Furthermore since we expect to have multiple cores, being able to more
easily identify and attribute per-core IRQ activity seems more useful
for debugging than copy-pasting from something really rather different
which also expects to be the only one of its kind on the system.
Thanks,
Robin.
+ core);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(core->dev, "failed to request job irq");
+ return ret;
+ }
