On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 09:59:18PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:58 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 9:07 AM Maarten Lankhorst > > <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Op 30-06-2021 om 18:44 schreef Ville Syrjala: > > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > The conversion to ww mutexes failed to address the fence code which > > > > already returns -EDEADLK when we run out of fences. Ww mutexes on > > > > the other hand treat -EDEADLK as an internal errno value indicating > > > > a need to restart the operation due to a deadlock. So now when the > > > > fence code returns -EDEADLK the higher level code erroneously > > > > restarts everything instead of returning the error to userspace > > > > as is expected. > > > > > > > > To remedy this let's switch the fence code to use a different errno > > > > value for this. -ENOBUFS seems like a semi-reasonable unique choice. > > > > Apart from igt the only user of this I could find is sna, and even > > > > there all we do is dump the current fence registers from debugfs > > > > into the X server log. So no user visible functionality is affected. > > > > If we really cared about preserving this we could of course convert > > > > back to -EDEADLK higher up, but doesn't seem like that's worth > > > > the hassle here. > > > > > > > > Not quite sure which commit specifically broke this, but I'll > > > > just attribute it to the general gem ww mutex work. > > > > > > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Testcase: igt/gem_pread/exhaustion > > > > Testcase: igt/gem_pwrite/basic-exhaustion > > > > Testcase: igt/gem_fenced_exec_thrash/too-many-fences > > > > Fixes: 80f0b679d6f0 ("drm/i915: Add an implementation for i915_gem_ww_ctx locking, v2.") > > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ggtt_fencing.c | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ggtt_fencing.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ggtt_fencing.c > > > > index cac7f3f44642..f8948de72036 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ggtt_fencing.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ggtt_fencing.c > > > > @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static struct i915_fence_reg *fence_find(struct i915_ggtt *ggtt) > > > > if (intel_has_pending_fb_unpin(ggtt->vm.i915)) > > > > return ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN); > > > > > > > > - return ERR_PTR(-EDEADLK); > > > > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOBUFS); > > > > } > > > > > > > > int __i915_vma_pin_fence(struct i915_vma *vma) > > > > > > Makes sense.. > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Is it a slightly more reent commit? Might probably be the part that converts execbuffer to use ww locks. > > > > - please cc: dri-devel on anything gem/gt related. Thought I did. Apparently got lost somewhere. > > - this should probably be ENOSPC or something like that for at least a > > seeming retention of errno consistentcy: ENOSPC is already used for other things. > > > > https://dri.freedesktop.org/docs/drm/gpu/drm-uapi.html#recommended-ioctl-return-values > > Other option would be to map that back to EDEADLK in the execbuf ioctl > somewhere, so we retain a distinct errno code. Already mentioned in the commit msg. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel