Commit d6b2c790 authored by Daniel Vetter's avatar Daniel Vetter
Browse files

drm/i915: non-interruptible sleeps can't handle -EAGAIN

So don't return -EAGAIN, even in the case of a gpu hang. Remap it to
-EIO instead. Note that this isn't really an issue with
interruptability, but more that we have quite a few codepaths (mostly
around kms stuff) that simply can't handle any errors and hence not
even -EAGAIN. Instead of adding proper failure paths so that we could
restart these ioctls we've opted for the cheap way out of sleeping
non-interruptibly.  Which works everywhere but when the gpu dies,
which this patch fixes.

So essentially interruptible == false means 'wait for the gpu or die
trying'.'

This patch is a bit ugly because intel_ring_begin is all non-interruptible
and hence only returns -EIO. But as the comment in there says,
auditing all the callsites would be a pain.

To avoid duplicating code, reuse i915_gem_check_wedge in __wait_seqno
and intel_wait_ring_buffer. Also use the opportunity to clarify the
different cases in i915_gem_check_wedge a bit with comments.

v2: Don't access dev_priv->mm.interruptible from check_wedge - we
might not hold dev->struct_mutex, making this racy. Instead pass
interruptible in as a parameter. I've noticed this because I've hit a
BUG_ON(!mutex_is_locked) at the top of check_wedge. This has been
added in

commit b4aca010


Author: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Date:   Wed Apr 25 20:50:12 2012 -0700

    drm/i915: extract some common olr+wedge code

although that commit is missing any justification for this. I guess
it's just copy&paste, because the same commit add the same BUG_ON
check to check_olr, where it indeed makes sense.

But in check_wedge everything we access is protected by other means,
so this is superflous. And because it now gets in the way (we add a
new caller in __wait_seqno, which can be called without
dev->struct_mutext) let's just remove it.

v3: Group all the i915_gem_check_wedge refactoring into this patch, so
that this patch here is all about not returning -EAGAIN to callsites
that can't handle syscall restarting.

v4: Add clarification what interuptible == fales means in our code,
requested by Ben Widawsky.

v5: Fix EAGAIN mispell noticed by Chris Wilson.
Reviewed-by: default avatarBen Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Reviewed-by: default avatarChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Tested-by: default avatarChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-Off-by: default avatarDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
parent d54a02c0
......@@ -1336,6 +1336,8 @@ i915_gem_object_unpin_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
void i915_gem_retire_requests(struct drm_device *dev);
void i915_gem_retire_requests_ring(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring);
int __must_check i915_gem_check_wedge(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
bool interruptible);
void i915_gem_reset(struct drm_device *dev);
void i915_gem_clflush_object(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj);
......
......@@ -1863,11 +1863,10 @@ i915_gem_retire_work_handler(struct work_struct *work)
mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
}
static int
i915_gem_check_wedge(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
int
i915_gem_check_wedge(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
bool interruptible)
{
BUG_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&dev_priv->dev->struct_mutex));
if (atomic_read(&dev_priv->mm.wedged)) {
struct completion *x = &dev_priv->error_completion;
bool recovery_complete;
......@@ -1878,7 +1877,16 @@ i915_gem_check_wedge(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
recovery_complete = x->done > 0;
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&x->wait.lock, flags);
return recovery_complete ? -EIO : -EAGAIN;
/* Non-interruptible callers can't handle -EAGAIN, hence return
* -EIO unconditionally for these. */
if (!interruptible)
return -EIO;
/* Recovery complete, but still wedged means reset failure. */
if (recovery_complete)
return -EIO;
return -EAGAIN;
}
return 0;
......@@ -1932,6 +1940,7 @@ static int __wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno,
unsigned long timeout_jiffies;
long end;
bool wait_forever = true;
int ret;
if (i915_seqno_passed(ring->get_seqno(ring), seqno))
return 0;
......@@ -1963,8 +1972,9 @@ static int __wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno,
end = wait_event_timeout(ring->irq_queue, EXIT_COND,
timeout_jiffies);
if (atomic_read(&dev_priv->mm.wedged))
end = -EAGAIN;
ret = i915_gem_check_wedge(dev_priv, interruptible);
if (ret)
end = ret;
} while (end == 0 && wait_forever);
getrawmonotonic(&now);
......@@ -2004,7 +2014,7 @@ i915_wait_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, uint32_t seqno)
BUG_ON(seqno == 0);
ret = i915_gem_check_wedge(dev_priv);
ret = i915_gem_check_wedge(dev_priv, dev_priv->mm.interruptible);
if (ret)
return ret;
......
......@@ -1228,8 +1228,10 @@ int intel_wait_ring_buffer(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, int n)
}
msleep(1);
if (atomic_read(&dev_priv->mm.wedged))
return -EAGAIN;
ret = i915_gem_check_wedge(dev_priv, dev_priv->mm.interruptible);
if (ret)
return ret;
} while (!time_after(jiffies, end));
trace_i915_ring_wait_end(ring);
return -EBUSY;
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment