On 2018-07-19 06:33 PM, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote: > On 07/19/2018 11:39 AM, Ville Syrjälä wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:19:56AM -0400, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote: >>> Problem: >>> FB is still not unpinned during the first run of amdgpu_bo_evict_vram >>> and so it's left for the second run, but during second run the SDMA for >>> moving buffer around already disabled and you have to do >>> it with CPU, but FB is not in visible VRAM and hence the eviction >>> failure >>> leading later to resume failure. >>> >>> Fix: >>> When DAL in use get a pointer to FB from crtc->primary->state rather >>> then from crtc->primary which is not set for DAL since it supports >>> atomic KMS. >>> >>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107065 >>> Fixes e00fb85 drm: Stop updating plane->crtc/fb/old_fb on atomic drivers >>> Signed-off-by: Andrey Grodzovsky <andrey.grodzovsky at amd.com> >>> --- >>>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 3 ++- >>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> index 709e4a3..dd9ebf7 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c >>> @@ -2642,7 +2642,8 @@ int amdgpu_device_suspend(struct drm_device >>> *dev, bool suspend, bool fbcon) >>>      /* unpin the front buffers and cursors */ >>>      list_for_each_entry(crtc, &dev->mode_config.crtc_list, head) { >>>          struct amdgpu_crtc *amdgpu_crtc = to_amdgpu_crtc(crtc); >>> -       struct drm_framebuffer *fb = crtc->primary->fb; >>> +        struct drm_framebuffer *fb = >>> amdgpu_device_has_dc_support(adev) ? >>> +                crtc->primary->state->fb : crtc->primary->fb; >> So apparently you haven't yet turned off the planes here. If I'm >> reading things right amdgpu_device_ip_suspend() should end up doing >> that through drm_atomic_helper_suspend(). So it looks like like now >> you'll end up unpinning the same bos twice. Doesn't that mess up >> some kind of refcount or something? > amdgpu_bo_unpin has a guard against that, amdgpu_bo_unreserve is less > clear. BO reservation shouldn't an issue here, BOs are only reserved for a short time around (un)pinning them. >> To me it would seem better to susped the display before trying >> to evict the bos. > > Yea, i was aware of that and indeed DAL shouldn't rely on the code in > amdgpu_device_suspend to unpin > front buffer and cursor since the atomic helper should do it. Problem is > that during amdgpu_device_ip_suspend > the SDMA engine gets suspended too, so you have to embed another > eviction in between, after display is suspended but before > SDMA and this forces ordering between them which kind of already in > place (amd_ip_block_type) but still it's an extra constrain. Ville's point (which I basically agree with) is that the display hardware should be turned off before evicting VRAM the first time, in which case no second eviction should be necessary (for this purpose). -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
