Does this patch fix it? https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/605437/ Alex On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 7:21 AM Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > What I meant is that the MES ring is now to small for the number of packets written to it. > > Either reduce the num_hw_submission or increase the MES ring size. > > E.g. see this code here in amdgpu_ring_init: > > if (ring->funcs->type == AMDGPU_RING_TYPE_KIQ) > sched_hw_submission = max(sched_hw_submission, 256); > else if (ring == &adev->sdma.instance[0].page) > sched_hw_submission = 256; > > We are basically just missing a case for the MES here as far as I can see. > > Regards, > Christian. > > Am 22.07.24 um 10:46 schrieb Xiao, Jack: > > [AMD Official Use Only - AMD Internal Distribution Only] > > > >> Can you try to reduce num_hw_submission for the MES ring? > > Smaller num_hw_submission should not help for this issue, for Mes work without drm scheduler like legacy kiq. Smaller num_hw_submission will result in smaller mes ring size and more waiting time. > > Regards, > Jack > ________________________________ > From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, 22 July 2024 16:20 > To: Xiao, Jack <Jack.Xiao@xxxxxxx>; amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/mes: fix mes ring buffer overflow > > Thx, but in that case this patch here then won't help either it just mitigates the problem. > > Can you try to reduce num_hw_submission for the MES ring? > > Thanks, > Christian. > > Am 22.07.24 um 05:27 schrieb Xiao, Jack: > > [AMD Official Use Only - AMD Internal Distribution Only] > > > >> I think we rather need to increase the MES ring size instead. > > Unfortunately, it doesn't work. I guess mes firmware has limitation. > > Regards, > Jack > > ________________________________ > From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, 19 July 2024 23:44 > To: Xiao, Jack <Jack.Xiao@xxxxxxx>; amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/mes: fix mes ring buffer overflow > > Am 19.07.24 um 11:16 schrieb Jack Xiao: > > wait memory room until enough before writing mes packets > > to avoid ring buffer overflow. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jack Xiao <Jack.Xiao@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c | 18 ++++++++++++++---- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v12_0.c | 18 ++++++++++++++---- > > 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c > > index 8ce51b9236c1..68c74adf79f1 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c > > @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > const char *op_str, *misc_op_str; > > unsigned long flags; > > u64 status_gpu_addr; > > - u32 status_offset; > > + u32 seq, status_offset; > > u64 *status_ptr; > > signed long r; > > int ret; > > @@ -196,6 +196,13 @@ static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > if (r) > > goto error_unlock_free; > > > > + seq = ++ring->fence_drv.sync_seq; > > + r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, > > + seq - ring->fence_drv.num_fences_mask, > > + timeout); > > + if (r < 1) > > + goto error_undo; > > + > > api_status = (struct MES_API_STATUS *)((char *)pkt + api_status_off); > > api_status->api_completion_fence_addr = status_gpu_addr; > > api_status->api_completion_fence_value = 1; > > @@ -208,8 +215,7 @@ static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > mes_status_pkt.header.dwsize = API_FRAME_SIZE_IN_DWORDS; > > mes_status_pkt.api_status.api_completion_fence_addr = > > ring->fence_drv.gpu_addr; > > - mes_status_pkt.api_status.api_completion_fence_value = > > - ++ring->fence_drv.sync_seq; > > + mes_status_pkt.api_status.api_completion_fence_value = seq; > > > > amdgpu_ring_write_multiple(ring, &mes_status_pkt, > > sizeof(mes_status_pkt) / 4); > > @@ -229,7 +235,7 @@ static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > dev_dbg(adev->dev, "MES msg=%d was emitted\n", > > x_pkt->header.opcode); > > > > - r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, ring->fence_drv.sync_seq, timeout); > > + r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, timeout); > > if (r < 1 || !*status_ptr) { > > > > if (misc_op_str) > > @@ -252,6 +258,10 @@ static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > amdgpu_device_wb_free(adev, status_offset); > > return 0; > > > > +error_undo: > > + dev_err(adev->dev, "MES ring buffer is full.\n"); > > + amdgpu_ring_undo(ring); > > + > > error_unlock_free: > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mes->ring_lock, flags); > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v12_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v12_0.c > > index c9f74231ad59..48e01206bcc4 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v12_0.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v12_0.c > > @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static int mes_v12_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > const char *op_str, *misc_op_str; > > unsigned long flags; > > u64 status_gpu_addr; > > - u32 status_offset; > > + u32 seq, status_offset; > > u64 *status_ptr; > > signed long r; > > int ret; > > @@ -182,6 +182,13 @@ static int mes_v12_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > if (r) > > goto error_unlock_free; > > > > + seq = ++ring->fence_drv.sync_seq; > > + r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, > > + seq - ring->fence_drv.num_fences_mask, > > That's what's amdgpu_fence_emit_polling() does anyway. > > So this here just moves the polling a bit earlier. > > I think we rather need to increase the MES ring size instead. > > Regards, > Christian. > > > > + timeout); > > + if (r < 1) > > + goto error_undo; > > + > > api_status = (struct MES_API_STATUS *)((char *)pkt + api_status_off); > > api_status->api_completion_fence_addr = status_gpu_addr; > > api_status->api_completion_fence_value = 1; > > @@ -194,8 +201,7 @@ static int mes_v12_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > mes_status_pkt.header.dwsize = API_FRAME_SIZE_IN_DWORDS; > > mes_status_pkt.api_status.api_completion_fence_addr = > > ring->fence_drv.gpu_addr; > > - mes_status_pkt.api_status.api_completion_fence_value = > > - ++ring->fence_drv.sync_seq; > > + mes_status_pkt.api_status.api_completion_fence_value = seq; > > > > amdgpu_ring_write_multiple(ring, &mes_status_pkt, > > sizeof(mes_status_pkt) / 4); > > @@ -215,7 +221,7 @@ static int mes_v12_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > dev_dbg(adev->dev, "MES msg=%d was emitted\n", > > x_pkt->header.opcode); > > > > - r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, ring->fence_drv.sync_seq, timeout); > > + r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, seq, timeout); > > if (r < 1 || !*status_ptr) { > > > > if (misc_op_str) > > @@ -238,6 +244,10 @@ static int mes_v12_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes, > > amdgpu_device_wb_free(adev, status_offset); > > return 0; > > > > +error_undo: > > + dev_err(adev->dev, "MES ring buffer is full.\n"); > > + amdgpu_ring_undo(ring); > > + > > error_unlock_free: > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mes->ring_lock, flags); > > > > >
