Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-29308-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240117031212.1104034-1-nunes.erico@gmail.com> <20240117031212.1104034-2-nunes.erico@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240117031212.1104034-2-nunes.erico@gmail.com>
From: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:13:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+E=qVcDynxk7E9+TwR6Vu9bhCHU-3WnGVk_170EFbUWn+0Adw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] drm/lima: fix devfreq refcount imbalance for job timeouts
To: Erico Nunes <nunes.erico@gmail.com>
Cc: Qiang Yu <yuq825@gmail.com>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, 
	lima@lists.freedesktop.org, 
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>, 
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>, David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, 
	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>, christian.koenig@amd.com, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 7:12=E2=80=AFPM Erico Nunes <nunes.erico@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
>
> In case a task manages to complete but it took just long enough to also
> trigger the timeout handler, the current code results in a refcount
> imbalance on lima_pm_idle.
>
> While this can be a rare occurrence, when it happens it may fill user
> logs with stack traces such as:
>
> [10136.669170] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_devfre=
q.c:205 lima_devfreq_record_idle+0xa0/0xb0
> ...
> [10136.669459] pc : lima_devfreq_record_idle+0xa0/0xb0
> ...
> [10136.669628] Call trace:
> [10136.669634]  lima_devfreq_record_idle+0xa0/0xb0
> [10136.669646]  lima_sched_pipe_task_done+0x5c/0xb0
> [10136.669656]  lima_gp_irq_handler+0xa8/0x120
> [10136.669666]  __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x48/0x160
> [10136.669679]  handle_irq_event+0x4c/0xc0
>
> The imbalance happens because lima_sched_pipe_task_done() already calls
> lima_pm_idle for this case if there was no error.
> Check the error flag in the timeout handler to ensure we can never run
> into this case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Erico Nunes <nunes.erico@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@gmail.com>

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_sched.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_sched.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lim=
a_sched.c
> index c3bf8cda8498..66317296d831 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_sched.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_sched.c
> @@ -427,7 +427,8 @@ static enum drm_gpu_sched_stat lima_sched_timedout_jo=
b(struct drm_sched_job *job
>         pipe->current_vm =3D NULL;
>         pipe->current_task =3D NULL;
>
> -       lima_pm_idle(ldev);
> +       if (pipe->error)
> +               lima_pm_idle(ldev);
>
>         drm_sched_resubmit_jobs(&pipe->base);
>         drm_sched_start(&pipe->base, true);
> --
> 2.43.0
>