Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp3813335pxj; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:11:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzAUPjquBuvAOPP/k0ifjJn8CwxaqLg9kXZTubDnx2UeQylDr6zO0PVjdX9OlygvRdmT8N8 X-Received: by 2002:a6b:6205:: with SMTP id f5mr20078832iog.60.1624284691087; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:11:31 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1624284691; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=rtaNnQqMes5qaWWVv+KgE9tEm8CjQqz6kY9OkaHwxLvJwXjfiWeMoF0axJUuK6CPW7 Khd2v4d9QCWPz3oCjyZ0/dPdCk1MBsm8VJCIkkyKGEdqPglApm3U4pu+ay0LzDGcWfKF scqy7+hQYzYEAE3FR4K7ME2e5b/e6F7bX0awgJ7bjit28O5aYZGLL2+Tt//UQhyLvJCb AV9pr7y+jM6Tw2s2+XKCJVPopSi3AnYl2QllDLvdv7ZYpFvp/0emuyhIsajnj4XVSwY4 +1P9l6jP6/dJ/seIbQe+ks/qBqSCCPMlAW9TvD7fAYtPktyhXj7tc4TnHtpsY8fDub01 kbsA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :dkim-signature; bh=AGlV2MD6otn2QQN/+YuOax/yo3OPIlMQZ3cJytPNMxk=; b=ME2zTbDjZjd7LS3xgSS5+6otsdMUbsmAZssvJZUSvkt1kO5C2OIjv6oM3N0L/tiOUe lSCkHF2faJh5FDw/tyt0KK1ZfC3HK6QwEU7EMNZj+pjGFgHphb82GoyyWaugN3VTSeSD fFCJb7W0giZXc1VhmertDIo0zpJLXMLeiwdPhPP8SQ0ZNL472AWfad8KWN6ZPnqhTVRl OcD+2/Wt5PEQL0Lm27ut6rBfW8xjSyd1kdjFRRZrgjGPioYHplWP73lxlITZ5+9Pfho5 gbBjBc+EEoYitTv59bF+WtTGpwHbZ96w/xpzDzIw5kyYfCroEjVZZ+nuNlu4HqbvB+wU mRHg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ffwll.ch header.s=google header.b=dxIdwiUM; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d6si8696757jam.40.2021.06.21.07.11.18; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ffwll.ch header.s=google header.b=dxIdwiUM; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229804AbhFUOM4 (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 10:12:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54260 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229736AbhFUOMz (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 10:12:55 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52469C061574 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id y7so19765424wrh.7 for ; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:10:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ffwll.ch; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=AGlV2MD6otn2QQN/+YuOax/yo3OPIlMQZ3cJytPNMxk=; b=dxIdwiUMehn6sA5E239voC+h18YFW+FN8JYbk25dQdz3MmrWeISh71T/6F/prqU6Yd PEFjzOn86SLmtfjabSAUl8gxsEiYQXRaC/IUMf3ZMnotC/iO7EjQQo9XmMTb3DkOrA7H 69+3iL0eMuT86aKepTsRZXvhrg/tP8rSDhZEo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to; bh=AGlV2MD6otn2QQN/+YuOax/yo3OPIlMQZ3cJytPNMxk=; b=YOlkVjNWkuC+3mppWmKzaOc849xrUURex3o1VzcUPyWIB3ZsXhWvyx0/PC95udSVVK uWFmrtVzdIOXCnY73ADpdy+Ov8HihjhqEDnvp0sHv0pBjhoxdqPcdhb0q8xWvKsvz5lJ X//7STtq2VSgeqJvxIZigE52Dmb4wrKis5ODxAT0kwtxyGelJll36flXW2b2imY5d6/u YAniZo0oljKQIgJopIvYK663Fl1DLZ9UxqUKslEDNx5IAuDKgRiDvwaQqHGr2PHZpqws iDtwRCB4FiFj0Y9r6zPEFauT1KhCkFhPRui9xqePOFAcXug/vxbLiXdQQ1klOrAhMZba OgYw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Jsnp6wZEE29YJsX0QGXJjF4qK5wwohQiHX1KAa61X6atLV5Jm 3UCwErKGGti1PHiIh8hS841zmA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f592:: with SMTP id f18mr14083074wro.81.1624284636881; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phenom.ffwll.local ([2a02:168:57f4:0:efd0:b9e5:5ae6:c2fa]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f12sm21491418wru.81.2021.06.21.07.10.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 16:10:34 +0200 From: Daniel Vetter To: Matthew Auld Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , David Airlie , Chris Wilson , Intel Graphics Development , ML dri-devel , kernel list , Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: drm/i915: __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL allocations in stable kernels Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Auld , Sergey Senozhatsky , Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , David Airlie , Chris Wilson , Intel Graphics Development , ML dri-devel , kernel list References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 5.10.0-7-amd64 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 04:46:24PM +0100, Matthew Auld wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 18:27, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 09:45:37PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We are observing some user-space crashes (sigabort, segfaults etc.) > > > under moderate memory pressure (pretty far from severe pressure) which > > > have one thing in common - restrictive GFP mask in setup_scratch_page(). > > > > > > For instance, (stable 4.19) drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > > > > (trimmed down version) > > > > > > static int gen8_init_scratch(struct i915_address_space *vm) > > > { > > > setup_scratch_page(vm, __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > > > > vm->scratch_pt = alloc_pt(vm); > > > vm->scratch_pd = alloc_pd(vm); > > > if (use_4lvl(vm)) { > > > vm->scratch_pdp = alloc_pdp(vm); > > > } > > > } > > > > > > gen8_init_scratch() function puts a rather inconsistent restrictions on mm. > > > > > > Looking at it line by line: > > > > > > setup_scratch_page() uses very restrictive gfp mask: > > > __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL > > > > > > it doesn't try to reclaim anything and fails almost immediately. > > > > > > alloc_pt() - uses more permissive gfp mask: > > > GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL | __GFP_NOWARN > > > > > > alloc_pd() - likewise: > > > GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL | __GFP_NOWARN > > > > > > alloc_pdp() - very permissive gfp mask: > > > GFP_KERNEL > > > > > > > > > So can all allocations in gen8_init_scratch() use > > > GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL | __GFP_NOWARN > > > > Yeah that looks all fairly broken tbh. The only thing I didn't know was > > that GFP_DMA32 wasn't a full gfp mask with reclaim bits set as needed. I > > guess it would be clearer if we use GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_DMA32 for these. > > > > The commit that introduced a lot of this, including I915_GFP_ALLOW_FAIL > > seems to be > > > > commit 1abb70f5955d1a9021f96359a2c6502ca569b68d > > Author: Chris Wilson > > Date: Tue May 22 09:36:43 2018 +0100 > > > > drm/i915/gtt: Allow pagedirectory allocations to fail > > > > which used a selftest as justification, not real world workloads, so looks > > rather dubious. > > > > Adding Matt Auld to this thread, maybe he has ideas. > > The latest code is quite different, but for both scratch and the > various paging structures it's now sharing the same GFP > flags(I915_GFP_ALLOW_FAIL). And for the actual backing page, which is > now a GEM object, we use i915_gem_object_get_pages_internal(). > > Not sure why scratch wants to be different, and I don't recall > anything funny. At first I thought it might have been related to > needing only one scratch page/directory etc which was then shared > between different VMs, but I don't think we had read-only support in > the driver at that point, so can't be that. But I guess once we did > add that seeing failures in init_scratch() was very unlikely, at least > until gen11+ arrived which then broke read-only support in the HW. If there is something, then shmem get_pages has some reason to use __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL - at least way back when dev->struct_mutex was still everywhere we had some paths to directly reclaim gem bo when the allocations failed. But I think that all disappeared, so all the reasons for MAYFAIL have gone away - if there's no fallback or call to our own shrinker or anything like that, then we must rely on core mm to try really hard to find the memory we want. This all goes back to commit 07f73f6912667621276b002e33844ef283d98203 Author: Chris Wilson Date: Mon Sep 14 16:50:30 2009 +0100 drm/i915: Improve behaviour under memory pressure but with a lot of detours and confusion going on (__GFP_NORETRY wasn't actually what we wanted, which is why __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL now exists). -Daniel > > > > > Thanks, Daniel > > > > > ? > > > > > > E.g. > > > > > > --- > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > index a12430187108..e862680b9c93 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > @@ -792,7 +792,7 @@ alloc_pdp(struct i915_address_space *vm) > > > > > > GEM_BUG_ON(!use_4lvl(vm)); > > > > > > - pdp = kzalloc(sizeof(*pdp), GFP_KERNEL); > > > + pdp = kzalloc(sizeof(*pdp), I915_GFP_ALLOW_FAIL); > > > if (!pdp) > > > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > > > > > > @@ -1262,7 +1262,7 @@ static int gen8_init_scratch(struct i915_address_space *vm) > > > { > > > int ret; > > > > > > - ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > + ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > @@ -1972,7 +1972,7 @@ static int gen6_ppgtt_init_scratch(struct gen6_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt) > > > u32 pde; > > > int ret; > > > > > > - ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > + ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > @@ -3078,7 +3078,7 @@ static int ggtt_probe_common(struct i915_ggtt *ggtt, u64 size) > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > } > > > > > > - ret = setup_scratch_page(&ggtt->vm, GFP_DMA32); > > > + ret = setup_scratch_page(&ggtt->vm, GFP_KERNEL | GFP_DMA32); > > > if (ret) { > > > DRM_ERROR("Scratch setup failed\n"); > > > /* iounmap will also get called at remove, but meh */ > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > It's quite similar on stable 5.4 - setup_scratch_page() uses restrictive > > > gfp mask again. > > > > > > --- > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > index f614646ed3f9..99d78b1052df 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > @@ -1378,7 +1378,7 @@ static int gen8_init_scratch(struct i915_address_space *vm) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > - ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > + ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > @@ -1753,7 +1753,7 @@ static int gen6_ppgtt_init_scratch(struct gen6_ppgtt *ppgtt) > > > struct i915_page_directory * const pd = ppgtt->base.pd; > > > int ret; > > > > > > - ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > + ret = setup_scratch_page(vm, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM); > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > @@ -2860,7 +2860,7 @@ static int ggtt_probe_common(struct i915_ggtt *ggtt, u64 size) > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > } > > > > > > - ret = setup_scratch_page(&ggtt->vm, GFP_DMA32); > > > + ret = setup_scratch_page(&ggtt->vm, GFP_KERNEL | GFP_DMA32); > > > if (ret) { > > > DRM_ERROR("Scratch setup failed\n"); > > > /* iounmap will also get called at remove, but meh */ > > > --- > > > > -- > > Daniel Vetter > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch