That would be a possibility, but I don't think reading the register once during driver startup is a real issue. See you need to hammer on the problematic registers to trigger the misbehavior, e.g. not read it once or twice but thousands of times. Additional to that as I said before, VM flushes are not really the problem. While investigating this I've worked around the VM flush issue by just writing the register value multiple times. That works around the problem pretty reliable as well and would be trivial to implement, but it just doesn't fix the real issue that the hardware is dropping register writes. And dropping register writes can have all kind of problematic effects, from performance problems because of not acknowledged interrupts, over incorrect calculation results to complete hangs. Regards, Christian. Am 09.03.2018 um 04:29 schrieb Deucher, Alexander: > > Can GIM read the value and pass it to the VF's via the vbios or the > shared area? > > > Alex > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Liu, Monk > *Sent:* Thursday, March 8, 2018 9:59:34 PM > *To:* Koenig, Christian; Deucher, Alexander; Mao, David > *Cc:* Jin, Jian-Rong; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > *Subject:* RE: deprecated register issues > > >Although KMD now use a cache way to give libdrm the > CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE value, but KMD still need to read it at least > one shot during loading driver right ? > > Correct, but we do this while having exclusive access. > > The problem is although for VF0 it is reading this register in > exclusive mode, but meanwhile another VF may doing the VM flush, thus > > The issue is still there as long as any VF is allowed to read this > register, > > Itâ??s not related if in exclusive or not > > /Monk > > *From:*Koenig, Christian > *Sent:* 2018å¹´3æ??8æ?¥18:51 > *To:* Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com>; Deucher, Alexander > <Alexander.Deucher at amd.com>; Mao, David <David.Mao at amd.com> > *Cc:* Jin, Jian-Rong <Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com>; > amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > *Subject:* Re: deprecated register issues > > Although KMD now use a cache way to give libdrm the > CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE value, but KMD still need to read it at > least one shot during loading driver right ? > > Correct, but we do this while having exclusive access. > > > Not only tlb flush, other ringâ??s vm flush of VF2 can all be ruined > by this registerâ??s reading from VF1, right ? > > Not sure about that. But as I said that problem is not limited to VM > flushes, e.g. when you access this register any other register write > or read can be affected. > > May theory is that accessing those registers sometimes times out when > the MC is to busy or something like this and this timeout in turn > results in a register bus reset which affects all other ongoing > operations as well. > > > How you solve that ? > > Stop accessing the affected registers as much as possible, there is no > really any other known workaround. > > The risk by accessing it when the driver loads is minimal, we just > need to make sure that we don't touch them during world switch. > > Regards, > Christian. > > Am 08.03.2018 um 11:11 schrieb Liu, Monk: > > To be more specific let me give you an example we face with now: > > Although KMD now use a cache way to give libdrm the > CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE value, but KMD still need to read it at > least one shot during loading driver right ? > > For SR-IOV there is still chance that VF2 is doing CPU based tlb > flush while VF1 is doing driver loading, so there are chance that > tlb flush of VF2 was ruined by > > The driver loading (one shot CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE reading). > > Not only tlb flush, other ringâ??s vm flush of VF2 can all be ruined > by this registerâ??s reading from VF1, right ? > > How you solve that ? > > /Monk > > *From:*amd-gfx [mailto:amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] *On > Behalf Of *Liu, Monk > *Sent:* 2018å¹´3æ??8æ?¥18:03 > *To:* Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com> > <mailto:Christian.Koenig at amd.com>; Deucher, Alexander > <Alexander.Deucher at amd.com> <mailto:Alexander.Deucher at amd.com>; > Mao, David <David.Mao at amd.com> <mailto:David.Mao at amd.com> > *Cc:* Jin, Jian-Rong <Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com> > <mailto:Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org> > *Subject:* RE: deprecated register issues > > Yeah, I agree with you weâ??d better find all those registers > > Stitch together the REQ and ACK part only avoid this issue for vm > flush only, and we may still hit the issue in other place, I knew it. > > The frustrating job is how can we find all those registers ? > > And more is since this CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE register is not > deprecated (confirmed with David M), and driver indeed nee to read it > > How could we avoid this reading cause vm hub broken ? > > I believe like you said there are a bunch of registers (not really > deprecated ) reading would cause vm hub broken, how could we still > read > > Them when we want but also not to trigger the world switch issue ? > > looks to me there is no way to do that, even if you already find > out all of those registers, we still need to access them, so the > world switch (or other issues) > > are still going to fail, and thatâ??s why I think the plan B at > least have its reason to stand there. > > any thought ? > > /Monk > > *From:*Christian König [mailto:ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com] > *Sent:* 2018å¹´3æ??8æ?¥17:41 > *To:* Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com <mailto:Monk.Liu at amd.com>>; > Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher at amd.com > <mailto:Alexander.Deucher at amd.com>>; Koenig, Christian > <Christian.Koenig at amd.com <mailto:Christian.Koenig at amd.com>>; Mao, > David <David.Mao at amd.com <mailto:David.Mao at amd.com>> > *Cc:* Jin, Jian-Rong <Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com > <mailto:Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com>>; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org> > *Subject:* Re: deprecated register issues > > Hi Monk, > > > While we can avoid such vm flush failure by stitch together of > the sending REQ and reading ACK part, at least for compute > ring this is confirmed. > > Well there are two misunderstanding here. > > First of all this solution doesn't really work, it just hides the > problem because we don't do a world switch in between those two > packets any more. And while we could change the SDMA, UVD and VCE > firmware do to something similar you can't apply this solution to > CPU based flushes. > > The second issue is that this isn't related to VMHUB flushing at > all, it's just that VMHUB flushing is the first thing where you > notice that something is wrong. > > The real problem is that when you access CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE and > a bunch of other registers the bus on Vega10 sometimes gets a > hickup and drops other reads and writes. > > So we need to identify those registers and removes all accesses to > them, otherwise working with the hardware will just be horrible > unreliable in general. > > Regards, > Christian. > > Am 08.03.2018 um 04:05 schrieb Liu, Monk: > > Hi Alex > > While we can avoid such vm flush failure by stitch together of > the sending REQ and reading ACK part, at least for compute > ring this is confirmed. > > And I believe for SDMA ring (even UVD/VCE ring) it could also > be achieved. > > But @Koenig, Christian <mailto:Christian.Koenig at amd.com> > insist stitching together the REQ AND ACK part is not a formal > way to fix the issue, instead just a walkaround and I cannot > debate that > > What make me worry more is what if there are more registers > like Alex said that behaves like this CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE, > > since we donâ??t know their names(too hard to filter them out!) > so we couldnâ??t remove them all from SR list, > > So I still think we need plan B to handle above case,  A.K.A > use one package for the REQ and ACK job > > /Monk > > *From:*Deucher, Alexander > *Sent:* 2018å¹´3æ??8æ?¥10:53 > *To:* Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com> <mailto:Monk.Liu at amd.com>; > Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com> > <mailto:Christian.Koenig at amd.com>; Mao, David > <David.Mao at amd.com> <mailto:David.Mao at amd.com> > *Cc:* amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>; Jin, Jian-Rong > <Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com> <mailto:Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com> > *Subject:* Re: deprecated register issues > > I think there are more than just CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE that > could cause this problem. IIRC, some entire class of gfx > registers could cause it, it just happened that this was one > of the only ones we readback via mmio. Also for the save and > restore list, I think the RLC uses a different interface to > read back the registers so it may not be affected the same way. > > Alex > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Liu, Monk > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 9:42:41 PM > *To:* Deucher, Alexander; Koenig, Christian; Mao, David > *Cc:* amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>; Jin, Jian-Rong > *Subject:* RE: deprecated register issues > > Hi guys > > According to Christianâ??s found, reading this register would > make vm hub failed to finish the vm flush request , e.g.: sdma > is doing vm flush which first write data to vm_invalidat_req > and read result from vm_invalidate_ack, but found driver will > forever failed to get the correct value from vm_invalidate_ack > if the meantime BIF is reading this CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE > register. > > Now SR-IOV world switch also may get such similar trouble, see > below save_restore_list ( during world_switch, RLCV will save > current VFâ??s register according to this list and restore all > those registers when loading back this VF) > > uint32 register_restore[] = { > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmPA_SC_FIFO_SIZE),  /* SC  */ > >       0x00000001, > > *      (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmCC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE),  > /* SC SC PER_SE */* > > *      0x00000000,* > > *      (uint32)((0x3400 << 18) | mmCC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE),  > /* SC SC PER_SE */* > > *      0x00000000,* > > *      (uint32)((0x3800 << 18) | mmCC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE),  > /* SC SC PER_SE */* > > *      0x00000000,* > > *      (uint32)((0x3c00 << 18) | mmCC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE),  > /* SC SC PER_SE */* > > *      0x00000000,* > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_VTX_VECT_EJECT_REG), > >       0x00000001, > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_DMA_DATA_FIFO_DEPTH),  /* IA > WD */ > >       0x00000001, > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_DMA_REQ_FIFO_DEPTH),  /* WD  */ > >       0x00000001, > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_DRAW_INIT_FIFO_DEPTH),  /* > WD  */ > >       0x00000001, > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_CACHE_INVALIDATION),  /* IA */ > >       0x00000001, > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_RESET_DEBUG),  /* WD */ > >       0x00000001, > > (uint32)((0x3000 << 18) | mmVGT_FIFO_DEPTHS), > > I will do some test against this CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE > register, see if vm flush failure issue could be avoided by > removing those four register from SR list > > Thanks > > /Monk > > *From:*Deucher, Alexander > *Sent:* 2018å¹´3æ??7æ?¥23:13 > *To:* Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig at amd.com > <mailto:Christian.Koenig at amd.com>>; Mao, David > <David.Mao at amd.com <mailto:David.Mao at amd.com>>; Liu, Monk > <Monk.Liu at amd.com <mailto:Monk.Liu at amd.com>> > *Cc:* amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>; Jin, Jian-Rong > <Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com <mailto:Jian-Rong.Jin at amd.com>> > *Subject:* Re: deprecated register issues > > Right. We ran into issues with reading back that register at > runtime when UMDs queried it when other stuff was in flight, > so we just read it once at startup and cache the results. Now > when UMDs request it, we return the cached value. > > Alex > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Koenig, Christian > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 7, 2018 9:31:13 AM > *To:* Mao, David; Liu, Monk > *Cc:* Deucher, Alexander; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>; Jin, Jian-Rong > *Subject:* Re: deprecated register issues > > Hi David, > > well I just figured that this is a misunderstanding. > > Accessing this register and some other deprecated registers > can cause problem when invalidating VMHUBs. > > This register itself isn't deprecated, the wording in a patch > fixing things is just a bit unclear. > > Question is is that register still accessed regularly or is it > value cached after startup? > > Regards, > Christian. > > Am 07.03.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Mao, David: > > We requires base driver to provide the mask of disabled RB. > > This is why kernel read the CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE to > collect the harvest configuration. > > Where did you get to know that the register is deprecated? > > I think it should still be there. > > Best Regards, > > David > > On Mar 7, 2018, at 9:49 PM, Liu, Monk > <Monk.Liu at amd.com <mailto:Monk.Liu at amd.com>> wrote: > > + UMD guys > > Hi David > > Do you know if*GC_USER_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE is still > exist for gfx9/vega10 ?* > > ** > > *We found*CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE was deprecated but > looks it is still in use in kmd, so > > I want to check with you both of above registers > > Thanks > > /Monk > > *From:*amd-gfx > [mailto:amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org]*On > Behalf Of*Christian K?nig > *Sent:*2018å¹´3æ??7æ?¥20:26 > *To:*Liu, Monk <Monk.Liu at amd.com > <mailto:Monk.Liu at amd.com>>; Deucher, Alexander > <Alexander.Deucher at amd.com > <mailto:Alexander.Deucher at amd.com>> > *Cc:*amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org> > *Subject:*Re: deprecated register issues > > Hi Monk, > > I honestly don't have the slightest idea why we are > still accessing CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE. Maybe it still > contains some useful values? > > Key point was that we needed to stop accessing it all > the time to avoid triggering problems. > > Regards, > Christian. > > Am 07.03.2018 um 13:11 schrieb Liu, Monk: > > Hi Christian > > I remember you and AlexD mentioned that a handful > registers are deprecated for greenland (gfx9) > > e.g. CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE > > do you know why we still have this routine ? > > staticu32 > > gfx_v9_0_get_rb_active_bitmap(structamdgpu_device > *adev) > > { > >     u32 data, mask; > >     data =RREG32_SOC15(GC, > > 0, mmCC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE); > >     data |=RREG32_SOC15(GC, > > 0, mmGC_USER_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE); > >     data &= > CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE__BACKEND_DISABLE_MASK; > >     data >>= > GC_USER_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE__BACKEND_DISABLE__SHIFT; > >     mask > =amdgpu_gfx_create_bitmask(adev->gfx.config.max_backends_per_se/ > > adev->gfx.config.max_sh_per_se); > >     return(~data) & mask; > > } > > see that it still read CC_RB_BACKEND_DISABLE > > thanks > > /Monk > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > amd-gfx mailing list > > amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org > <mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/attachments/20180309/feb0e7f2/attachment-0001.html>
