Am 15.03.21 um 18:11 schrieb Andrey Grodzovsky:
On 2021-03-15 12:55 p.m., Christian König wrote:
Am 15.03.21 um 17:21 schrieb Andrey Grodzovsky:
On 2021-03-15 12:10 p.m., Christian König wrote:
Am 12.03.21 um 16:34 schrieb Andrey Grodzovsky:
On 2021-03-12 4:03 a.m., Christian König wrote:
Am 11.03.21 um 23:40 schrieb Andrey Grodzovsky:
[SNIP]
The expected result is they all move closer to the start of
PCI address
space.
Ok, I updated as you described. Also I removed PCI conf command
to stop
address decoding and restart later as I noticed PCI core does
it itself
when needed.
I tested now also with graphic desktop enabled while submitting
3d draw commands and seems like under this scenario everything
still
works. Again, this all needs to be tested with VRAM BAR move as
then
I believe I will see more issues like handling of MMIO mapped
VRAM objects (like GART table). In case you do have an AMD card
you could also maybe give it a try. In the meanwhile I will add
support to ioremapping of those VRAM objects.
Andrey
Just an update, added support for unmaping/remapping of all VRAM
objects, both user space mmaped and kernel ioremaped. Seems to work
ok but again, without forcing VRAM BAR to move I can't be sure.
Alex, Chsristian - take a look when you have some time to give
me some
initial feedback on the amdgpu side.
The code is at
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agrodzov/linux/log/?h=yadro%2Fpcie_hotplug%2Fmovable_bars_v9.1
Mhm, that let's userspace busy retry until the BAR movement is done.
Not sure if that can't live lock somehow.
Christian.
In my testing it didn't but, I can instead route them to some
global static dummy page while BARs are moving and then when
everything
done just invalidate the device address space again and let the
pagefaults fill in valid PFNs again.
Well that won't work because the reads/writes which are done in the
meantime do need to wait for the BAR to be available again.
So waiting for the BAR move to finish is correct, but what we
should do is to use a lock instead of an SRCU because that makes
lockdep complain when we do something nasty.
Christian.
Spinlock I assume ? We can't sleep there - it's an interrupt.
Mhm, the BAR movement is in interrupt context?
No, BARs move is in task context I believe. The page faults are in
interrupt context and so we can only lock a spinlock there I assume,
No, page faults are in task context as well! Otherwise you wouldn't be
able to sleep for network I/O in a page fault for example.
not a mutex which might sleep. But we can't lock
spinlock for the entire BAR move because HW suspend + asic reset is a
long process with some sleeps/context switches inside it probably.
Well that is rather bad. I was hoping to rename the GPU reset rw_sem
into device_access rw_sem and then use the same lock for both (It's
essentially the same problem).
I was thinking about it from day 1 but what looked to me different is
that in GPU reset case there is no technical need to block MMIO
accesses as the BARs are not moving
and so the page table entries remain valid. It's true that while the
device in reset those MMIO accesses are meaninglessness - so this
indeed could be good reason to block
access even during GPU reset.
From the experience now I would say that we should block MMIO access
during GPU reset as necessary.
We can't do things like always taking the lock in each IOCTL, but for
low level hardware access it shouldn't be a problem at all.
Christian.
Andrey
But when we need to move the BAR in atomic/interrupt context that
makes things a bit more complicated.
Christian.
Andrey
Andrey
Andrey
