+Thomas, +Christian, +dri-devel
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 11:42:46AM GMT, Nirmoy Das wrote:
On 5/7/2024 11:39 AM, Nirmoy Das wrote:
On 5/7/2024 10:04 AM, Shuicheng Lin wrote:
Here is the failure stack:
[ 12.988209] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 12.988216] UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in ./include/linux/log2.h:57:13
[ 12.988232] shift exponent 64 is too large for 64-bit type 'long unsigned
int'
[ 12.988235] CPU: 4 PID: 1310 Comm: gnome-shell Tainted: G U
6.9.0-rc6+prerelease1158+ #19
[ 12.988237] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Raptor Lake Client
Platform/RPL-S ADP-S DDR5 UDIMM CRB, BIOS RPLSFWI1.R00.3301.A02.2208050712
08/05/2022
[ 12.988239] Call Trace:
[ 12.988240] <TASK>
[ 12.988242] dump_stack_lvl+0xd7/0xf0
[ 12.988248] dump_stack+0x10/0x20
[ 12.988250] ubsan_epilogue+0x9/0x40
[ 12.988253] __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds+0x10e/0x170
[ 12.988260] dma_resv_reserve_fences.cold+0x2b/0x48
[ 12.988262] ? ww_mutex_lock_interruptible+0x3c/0x110
[ 12.988267] drm_exec_prepare_obj+0x45/0x60 [drm_exec]
[ 12.988271] ? vm_bind_ioctl_ops_execute+0x5b/0x740 [xe]
[ 12.988345] vm_bind_ioctl_ops_execute+0x78/0x740 [xe]
It is caused by the value 0 of parameter num_fences in function
drm_exec_prepare_obj.
And lead to in function __rounddown_pow_of_two, "0 - 1" causes the
shift-out-of-bounds.
For the num_fences, it should be 1 at least.
Cc: Matthew Brost<matthew.br...@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuicheng Lin<shuicheng....@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
index d17192c8b7de..96cb4d9762a3 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
@@ -2692,7 +2692,7 @@ static int vma_lock_and_validate(struct drm_exec *exec,
struct xe_vma *vma,
if (bo) {
if (!bo->vm)
- err = drm_exec_prepare_obj(exec, &bo->ttm.base, 0);
+ err = drm_exec_prepare_obj(exec, &bo->ttm.base, 1);
This needs to be fixed in drm_exec_prepare_obj() by checking
num_fences and not calling dma_resv_reserve_fences()
or just call drm_exec_lock_obj() here. ref:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/577487/
we are hit again by this. Couldn't we change drm_exec_prepare_obj() to
check num_fences and if is 0 just fallback to just do
drm_exec_lock_obj() as "the least amount of work needed in this case"?
Something like this:
| diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_exec.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_exec.c
| index 2da094bdf8a4..68b5f6210b09 100644
| --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_exec.c
| +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_exec.c
| @@ -296,10 +296,12 @@ int drm_exec_prepare_obj(struct drm_exec *exec, struct
drm_gem_object *obj,
| if (ret)
| return ret;
|
| - ret = dma_resv_reserve_fences(obj->resv, num_fences);
| - if (ret) {
| - drm_exec_unlock_obj(exec, obj);
| - return ret;
| + if (num_fences) {
| + ret = dma_resv_reserve_fences(obj->resv, num_fences);
| + if (ret) {
| + drm_exec_unlock_obj(exec, obj);
| + return ret;
| + }
| }
|
| return 0;
thanks
Lucas De Marchi
Nirmoy
Regards,
Nirmoy
if (!err && validate)
err = xe_bo_validate(bo, xe_vma_vm(vma), true);
}
@@ -2777,7 +2777,7 @@ static int vm_bind_ioctl_ops_lock_and_prep(struct
drm_exec *exec,
struct xe_vma_op *op;
int err;
- err = drm_exec_prepare_obj(exec, xe_vm_obj(vm), 0);
+ err = drm_exec_prepare_obj(exec, xe_vm_obj(vm), 1);
if (err)
return err;
