On 10/29/2024 05:01, Nirmoy Das wrote:
Should this not be a warning as well? To match the one in the G2H code, with the reason being that we want CI to track how often this is occurring.Flush xe ordered_wq in case of ufence timeout which is observed on LNL and that points to recent scheduling issue with E-cores. This is similar to the recent fix: commit e51527233804 ("drm/xe/guc/ct: Flush g2h worker in case of g2h response timeout") and should be removed once there is a E-core scheduling fix for LNL. v2: Add platform check(Himal) s/__flush_workqueue/flush_workqueue(Jani) v3: Remove gfx platform check as the issue related to cpu platform(John) v4: Use the Common macro(John) and print when the flush resolves timeout(Matt B) Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v6.11+ Link: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel/-/issues/2754 Suggested-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c index f5deb81eba01..5b4264ea38bd 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c @@ -155,6 +155,13 @@ int xe_wait_user_fence_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, }if (!timeout) {+ LNL_FLUSH_WORKQUEUE(xe->ordered_wq); + err = do_compare(addr, args->value, args->mask, + args->op); + if (err <= 0) { + drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "LNL_FLUSH_WORKQUEUE resolved ufence timeout\n");
John.
+ break; + } err = -ETIME; break; }
