On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 06:36:44PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 03:29:22PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > Display the workqueue status in debugfs for GuC contexts that are in
> > parent-child relationship.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 56 +++++++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > index 30df1c8db491..44a7582c9aed 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > @@ -4527,31 +4527,53 @@ void intel_guc_submission_print_info(struct intel_guc *guc,
> > gse_log_submission_info(guc->gse[i], p, i);
> > }
> >
> > +static inline void guc_log_context(struct drm_printer *p,
> > + struct intel_context *ce)
> > +{
> > + drm_printf(p, "GuC lrc descriptor %u:\n", ce->guc_id);
> > + drm_printf(p, "\tHW Context Desc: 0x%08x\n", ce->lrc.lrca);
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tLRC Head: Internal %u, Memory %u\n",
> > + ce->ring->head,
> > + ce->lrc_reg_state[CTX_RING_HEAD]);
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tLRC Tail: Internal %u, Memory %u\n",
> > + ce->ring->tail,
> > + ce->lrc_reg_state[CTX_RING_TAIL]);
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tContext Pin Count: %u\n",
> > + atomic_read(&ce->pin_count));
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tGuC ID Ref Count: %u\n",
> > + atomic_read(&ce->guc_id_ref));
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tNumber Requests Not Ready: %u\n",
> > + atomic_read(&ce->guc_num_rq_not_ready));
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tSchedule State: 0x%x, 0x%x\n\n",
> > + ce->guc_state.sched_state,
> > + atomic_read(&ce->guc_sched_state_no_lock));
>
> It's all debugfs, but I think proper locking even there is good. It at
> least reduces the confusion when the locking scheme is largely
> undocumented. Also given how much we have rcu for everything would be good
> to double-check all pointer dererences are properly protected.
>
Not sure if I 100% follow this but I don't think any of the pointers
dref here are RCU protected. Certainly none of the GuC ones are.
Will double before the next respin though.
> > +}
> > +
> > void intel_guc_submission_print_context_info(struct intel_guc *guc,
> > struct drm_printer *p)
> > {
> > struct intel_context *ce;
> > unsigned long index;
> > xa_for_each(&guc->context_lookup, index, ce) {
>
> xa_for_each doesn't provide any guarantees, so doesn't protect against
> concurrent removeal or anything like that. We need to do better than that.
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/xarray.h#L498
'It is safe to modify the array during the iteration.'
Matt
> -Daniel
>
> > - drm_printf(p, "GuC lrc descriptor %u:\n", ce->guc_id);
> > - drm_printf(p, "\tHW Context Desc: 0x%08x\n", ce->lrc.lrca);
> > - drm_printf(p, "\t\tLRC Head: Internal %u, Memory %u\n",
> > - ce->ring->head,
> > - ce->lrc_reg_state[CTX_RING_HEAD]);
> > - drm_printf(p, "\t\tLRC Tail: Internal %u, Memory %u\n",
> > - ce->ring->tail,
> > - ce->lrc_reg_state[CTX_RING_TAIL]);
> > - drm_printf(p, "\t\tContext Pin Count: %u\n",
> > - atomic_read(&ce->pin_count));
> > - drm_printf(p, "\t\tGuC ID Ref Count: %u\n",
> > - atomic_read(&ce->guc_id_ref));
> > - drm_printf(p, "\t\tNumber Requests Not Ready: %u\n",
> > - atomic_read(&ce->guc_num_rq_not_ready));
> > - drm_printf(p, "\t\tSchedule State: 0x%x, 0x%x\n\n",
> > - ce->guc_state.sched_state,
> > - atomic_read(&ce->guc_sched_state_no_lock));
> > + GEM_BUG_ON(intel_context_is_child(ce));
> >
> > + guc_log_context(p, ce);
> > guc_log_context_priority(p, ce);
> > +
> > + if (intel_context_is_parent(ce)) {
> > + struct guc_process_desc *desc = __get_process_desc(ce);
> > + struct intel_context *child;
> > +
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tWQI Head: %u\n",
> > + READ_ONCE(desc->head));
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tWQI Tail: %u\n",
> > + READ_ONCE(desc->tail));
> > + drm_printf(p, "\t\tWQI Status: %u\n\n",
> > + READ_ONCE(desc->wq_status));
> > +
> > + for_each_child(ce, child)
> > + guc_log_context(p, child);
> > + }
> > }
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.28.0
> >
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
