On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 08:11:43AM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:58:52PM +0300, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:38:52PM +0300, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:02:45PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > While the current locking/serialization of the global state
> > > > suffices for protecting the obj->state access and the actual
> > > > hardware reprogramming, we do have a problem with accessing
> > > > the old/new states during nonblocking commits.
> > > >
> > > > The state computation and swap will be protected by the crtc
> > > > locks, but the commit_tails can finish out of order, thus also
> > > > causing the atomic states to be cleaned up out of order. This
> > > > would mean the commit that started first but finished last has
> > > > had its new state freed as the no-longer-needed old state by the
> > > > other commit.
> > > >
> > > > To fix this let's just refcount the states. obj->state amounts
> > > > to one reference, and the intel_atomic_state holds extra references
> > > > to both its new and old global obj states.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 0ef1905ecf2e ("drm/i915: Introduce better global state handling")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++---
> > > > .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.h | 3 ++
> > > > 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.c
> > > > index 212d4ee68205..7a19215ad844 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.c
> > > > @@ -10,6 +10,28 @@
> > > > #include "intel_display_types.h"
> > > > #include "intel_global_state.h"
> > > >
> > > > +static void __intel_atomic_global_state_free(struct kref *kref)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct intel_global_state *obj_state =
> > > > + container_of(kref, struct intel_global_state, ref);
> > > > + struct intel_global_obj *obj = obj_state->obj;
> > > > +
> > > > + obj->funcs->atomic_destroy_state(obj, obj_state);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static void intel_atomic_global_state_put(struct intel_global_state *obj_state)
> > > > +{
> > > > + kref_put(&obj_state->ref, __intel_atomic_global_state_free);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static struct intel_global_state *
> > > > +intel_atomic_global_state_get(struct intel_global_state *obj_state)
> > > > +{
> > > > + kref_get(&obj_state->ref);
> > > > +
> > > > + return obj_state;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > void intel_atomic_global_obj_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > > > struct intel_global_obj *obj,
> > > > struct intel_global_state *state,
> > > > @@ -17,6 +39,10 @@ void intel_atomic_global_obj_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > > > {
> > > > memset(obj, 0, sizeof(*obj));
> > > >
> > > > + state->obj = obj;
> > > > +
> > > > + kref_init(&state->ref);
> > > > +
> > > > obj->state = state;
> > > > obj->funcs = funcs;
> > > > list_add_tail(&obj->head, &dev_priv->global_obj_list);
> > > > @@ -28,7 +54,9 @@ void intel_atomic_global_obj_cleanup(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > >
> > > > list_for_each_entry_safe(obj, next, &dev_priv->global_obj_list, head) {
> > > > list_del(&obj->head);
> > > > - obj->funcs->atomic_destroy_state(obj, obj->state);
> > > > +
> > > > + drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm, kref_read(&obj->state->ref) != 1);
> > > > + intel_atomic_global_state_put(obj->state);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > @@ -97,10 +125,14 @@ intel_atomic_get_global_obj_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > > if (!obj_state)
> > > > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > > >
> > > > + obj_state->obj = obj;
> > > > obj_state->changed = false;
> > > >
> > > > + kref_init(&obj_state->ref);
> > > > +
> > > > state->global_objs[index].state = obj_state;
> > > > - state->global_objs[index].old_state = obj->state;
> > > > + state->global_objs[index].old_state =
> > > > + intel_atomic_global_state_get(obj->state);
> > > > state->global_objs[index].new_state = obj_state;
> > > > state->global_objs[index].ptr = obj;
> > > > obj_state->state = state;
> > > > @@ -163,7 +195,9 @@ void intel_atomic_swap_global_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > > > new_obj_state->state = NULL;
> > > >
> > > > state->global_objs[i].state = old_obj_state;
> > > > - obj->state = new_obj_state;
> > > > +
> > > > + intel_atomic_global_state_put(obj->state);
> > > > + obj->state = intel_atomic_global_state_get(new_obj_state);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > @@ -172,10 +206,9 @@ void intel_atomic_clear_global_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> > > > int i;
> > > >
> > > > for (i = 0; i < state->num_global_objs; i++) {
> > > > - struct intel_global_obj *obj = state->global_objs[i].ptr;
> > > > + intel_atomic_global_state_put(state->global_objs[i].old_state);
> > > > + intel_atomic_global_state_put(state->global_objs[i].new_state);
> > >
> > > Shouldn't we clean old_state only?
> > >
> > > As I understand in absence of any transaction you now have a pool of
> > > global_obj each has a state with single kref taken.
> > >
> > > So when we are going to get a new state, we do +1 kref to old_state(which is current global obj->state)
> > > in order to prevent it being cleared by competing commit.
> > > However the new state doesn't have any kref taken by that moment.
> > > Then you swap do -1 kref for the old state and do +1 kref for new state,
> > > which means that when you -1 kref again for old state in atomic_clear also,
> > > it will be destroyed, however regarding the new state, as I understand
> > > it still has only single kref grabbed when it was swapped,
> > > so isn't it going to be now removed? unless we are lucky and somebody
> > > haven't grabbed it already as an old_state in the next commit?
> > >
> > > Stan
> >
> > Ah actually I got it - forgot that kref is init as 1.
> > But then you probably don't even need to increment kref for new state
> > when swapping.
> > Before assigning new obj->state you release one kref in swap(which makes sense)
> > Then you just do only intel_atomic_global_state_put(old_state) in atomic_clear
> > and then no need in doing intel_atomic_global_state_get(new_state) during
> > swap.
> > I.e we always call intel_atomic_global_state_get/put only regarding "old"
> > obj->state and each new_state will be disposed when it becomes old_state.
>
>
> IMO the approach of handing off references is just hard to follow.
> Better to just get/put explicitly whenever you assign a pointer.
> I already dislike handing off the original kref_init() reference,
> and almost added a get+put there too. Maybe I really should do that...
Agree, tbh I don't like the idea that kref_init already implicitly holds
a reference - it even confused me initially.
Typical smartpointer usually increments the ref only when assignment
is done.
Reviewed-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> >
> > Stan
> >
> > > >
> > > > - obj->funcs->atomic_destroy_state(obj,
> > > > - state->global_objs[i].state);
> > > > state->global_objs[i].ptr = NULL;
> > > > state->global_objs[i].state = NULL;
> > > > state->global_objs[i].old_state = NULL;
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.h
> > > > index e6163a469029..1f16fa3073c9 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_global_state.h
> > > > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> > > > #ifndef __INTEL_GLOBAL_STATE_H__
> > > > #define __INTEL_GLOBAL_STATE_H__
> > > >
> > > > +#include <linux/kref.h>
> > > > #include <linux/list.h>
> > > >
> > > > struct drm_i915_private;
> > > > @@ -54,7 +55,9 @@ struct intel_global_obj {
> > > > for_each_if(obj)
> > > >
> > > > struct intel_global_state {
> > > > + struct intel_global_obj *obj;
> > > > struct intel_atomic_state *state;
> > > > + struct kref ref;
> > > > bool changed;
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.26.2
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > > > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
