On 07/31, Sidong Yang wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 11:08:34AM +0200, dan...@ffwll.ch wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 07:09:25AM -0300, Melissa Wen wrote: > > > On 07/29, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 9:09 PM Melissa Wen <melissa....@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Melissa Wen > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 3:12 PM Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 7:45 PM Melissa Wen <melissa....@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 07/25, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 5:12 AM Sidong Yang > > > > > > > > <realwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 05:17:05PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:06 PM Melissa Wen > > > > > > > > > > <melissa....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 07/22, dan...@ffwll.ch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 08:04:11AM -0300, Melissa Wen > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch adds a missing drm_crtc_vblank_put op to > > > > > > > > > > > > > the pair > > > > > > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_vblank_get/put (inc/decrement counter to > > > > > > > > > > > > > guarantee vblanks). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It clears the execution of the following > > > > > > > > > > > > > kms_cursor_crc subtests: > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. pipe-A-cursor-[size,alpha-opaque, NxN-(on-screen, > > > > > > > > > > > > > off-screen, sliding, > > > > > > > > > > > > > random, fast-moving])] - successful when running > > > > > > > > > > > > > individually. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. pipe-A-cursor-dpms passes again > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. pipe-A-cursor-suspend also passes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue was initially tracked in the sequential > > > > > > > > > > > > > execution of IGT > > > > > > > > > > > > > kms_cursor_crc subtest: when running the test > > > > > > > > > > > > > sequence or one of its > > > > > > > > > > > > > subtests twice, the odd execs complete and the pairs > > > > > > > > > > > > > get stuck in an > > > > > > > > > > > > > endless wait. In the IGT code, calling a > > > > > > > > > > > > > wait_for_vblank before the start > > > > > > > > > > > > > of CRC capture prevented the busy-wait. But the > > > > > > > > > > > > > problem persisted in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > pipe-A-cursor-dpms and -suspend subtests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checking the history, the pipe-A-cursor-dpms subtest > > > > > > > > > > > > > was successful when, > > > > > > > > > > > > > in vkms_atomic_commit_tail, instead of using the > > > > > > > > > > > > > flip_done op, it used > > > > > > > > > > > > > wait_for_vblanks. Another way to prevent blocking was > > > > > > > > > > > > > wait_one_vblank when > > > > > > > > > > > > > enabling crtc. However, in both cases, > > > > > > > > > > > > > pipe-A-cursor-suspend persisted > > > > > > > > > > > > > blocking in the 2nd start of CRC capture, which may > > > > > > > > > > > > > indicate that > > > > > > > > > > > > > something got stuck in the step of CRC setup. Indeed, > > > > > > > > > > > > > wait_one_vblank in > > > > > > > > > > > > > the crc setup was able to sync things and free all > > > > > > > > > > > > > kms_cursor_crc > > > > > > > > > > > > > subtests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tracing and comparing a clean run with a blocked one: > > > > > > > > > > > > > - in a clean one, vkms_crtc_atomic_flush enables > > > > > > > > > > > > > vblanks; > > > > > > > > > > > > > - when blocked, only in next op, > > > > > > > > > > > > > vkms_crtc_atomic_enable, the vblanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > started. Moreover, a series of vkms_vblank_simulate > > > > > > > > > > > > > flow out until > > > > > > > > > > > > > disabling vblanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also watching the steps of vkms_crtc_atomic_flush, > > > > > > > > > > > > > when the very first > > > > > > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_vblank_get returned an error, the subtest > > > > > > > > > > > > > crashed. On the other > > > > > > > > > > > > > hand, when vblank_get succeeded, the subtest > > > > > > > > > > > > > completed. Finally, checking > > > > > > > > > > > > > the flush steps: it increases counter to hold a > > > > > > > > > > > > > vblank reference (get), > > > > > > > > > > > > > but there isn't a op to decreased it and release > > > > > > > > > > > > > vblanks (put). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiram...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Haneen Mohammed <hamohammed...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Melissa Wen <melissa....@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_crtc.c | 1 + > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_crtc.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_crtc.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > index ac85e17428f8..a99d6b4a92dd 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_crtc.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_crtc.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -246,6 +246,7 @@ static void > > > > > > > > > > > > > vkms_crtc_atomic_flush(struct drm_crtc *crtc, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > spin_unlock(&crtc->dev->event_lock); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + drm_crtc_vblank_put(crtc); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Uh so I reviewed this a bit more carefully now, and I > > > > > > > > > > > > dont think this is > > > > > > > > > > > > the correct bugfix. From the kerneldoc of > > > > > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_arm_vblank_event(): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * Caller must hold a vblank reference for the event @e > > > > > > > > > > > > acquired by a > > > > > > > > > > > > * drm_crtc_vblank_get(), which will be dropped when > > > > > > > > > > > > the next vblank arrives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So when we call drm_crtc_arm_vblank_event then the > > > > > > > > > > > > vblank_put gets called > > > > > > > > > > > > for us. And that's the only case where we successfully > > > > > > > > > > > > acquired a vblank > > > > > > > > > > > > interrupt reference since on failure of > > > > > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_vblank_get (0 indicates > > > > > > > > > > > > success for that function, failure negative error > > > > > > > > > > > > number) we directly send > > > > > > > > > > > > out the event. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So something else fishy is going on, and now I'm > > > > > > > > > > > > totally confused why this > > > > > > > > > > > > even happens. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We also have a pile of WARN_ON checks in > > > > > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_vblank_put to make sure > > > > > > > > > > > > we don't underflow the refcount, so it's also not that > > > > > > > > > > > > I think (except if > > > > > > > > > > > > this patch creates more WARNING backtraces). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But clearly it changes behaviour somehow ... can you > > > > > > > > > > > > try to figure out > > > > > > > > > > > > what changes? Maybe print out the vblank->refcount at > > > > > > > > > > > > various points in > > > > > > > > > > > > the driver, and maybe also trace when exactly the fake > > > > > > > > > > > > vkms vblank hrtimer > > > > > > > > > > > > is enabled/disabled ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can check these, but I also have other suspicions. When > > > > > > > > > > > I place the > > > > > > > > > > > drm_crct_vblank_put out of the if (at the end of flush), > > > > > > > > > > > it not only solve > > > > > > > > > > > the issue of blocking on kms_cursor_crc, but also the > > > > > > > > > > > WARN_ON on kms_flip > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't appear anymore (a total cleanup). Just after: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vkms_output->composer_state = > > > > > > > > > > > to_vkms_crtc_state(crtc->state); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > looks like there is something stuck around here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hm do you have the full WARNING for this? Maybe this gives > > > > > > > > > > me an idea > > > > > > > > > > what's going wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Besides, there is a lock at atomic_begin: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* This lock is held across the atomic commit to block > > > > > > > > > > > vblank timer > > > > > > > > > > > * from scheduling vkms_composer_worker until the > > > > > > > > > > > composer is updated > > > > > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > spin_lock_irq(&vkms_output->lock); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that seems to be released on atomic_flush and make me > > > > > > > > > > > suspect something > > > > > > > > > > > missing on the composer update. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > atomic_begin/atomic_flush are symmetric functions an always > > > > > > > > > > called > > > > > > > > > > around all the plane updates. So having the spin_lock in > > > > > > > > > > _begin and > > > > > > > > > > the spin_unlock in _flush should be symmetric and correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to make sure, recompile with > > > > > > > > > > CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, which > > > > > > > > > > should immmediately give you a huge splat in dmesg if > > > > > > > > > > there's anything > > > > > > > > > > unbalanced with locking. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll check all these things and come back with news > > > > > > > > > > > (hope) :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have fun chasing stuff :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Melissa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm totally confused about what's going on here now. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Daniel, Melissa. > > > > > > > > > I found something about this problem. > > > > > > > > > I traced vblank->refcount that it's important in the problem. > > > > > > > > > In normal case, first test run calls commit_tail() and enable > > > > > > > > > vblank in > > > > > > > > > atomic_flush(). in drm_vblank_get(), it enable vblank when > > > > > > > > > refcount was zero. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in first test run, it disable crtc for cleanup test. > > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_vblank_off() was > > > > > > > > > called by atomic_disable. in this function vblank's refcount > > > > > > > > > was increased for > > > > > > > > > prevent subsequent drm_vblank_get() from re-enabling the > > > > > > > > > vblank interrupt. > > > > > > > > > and refcount goes one not zero for next test run. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and next test run, drm_vblank_get() was called but it didn't > > > > > > > > > enable vblank > > > > > > > > > because refcount was already one. drm_crtc_vblank_on() was > > > > > > > > > called in next. but > > > > > > > > > it didn't enable vblank but just increase refcount only. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this is why this problem happen. don't know how to > > > > > > > > > fix this correctly. > > > > > > > > > should we force to enable vblank after enabling crtc? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hm, between drm_crtc_vblank_off and drm_crtc_vblank_on > > > > > > > > drm_crtc_vblank_get should fail (and leave the refcount > > > > > > > > unchanged). > > > > > > > > It's convoluted logic, but the check for vblank->enabled should > > > > > > > > catch > > > > > > > > that and return -EINVAL for this case. Does that not happen? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It would indeed explain the bug (I think, I've been wrong way > > > > > > > > too many > > > > > > > > times with this). > > > > > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Daniel and Sidong, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know if it will be confusing, but I will try to explain > > > > > > > in a > > > > > > > little more detail (and newbie way) what I saw in this behavior > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > refcount (similar to what Sidong evaluated). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Starting with the loading of vkms is: > > > > > > > In vkms_init: > > > > > > > After drm_vblank_init (refcount=0), it calls: > > > > > > > vkms_modeset_init > > > > > > > --> vkms_output_init > > > > > > > ----> drm_mode_config_reset > > > > > > > -------> vkms_atomic_crtc_reset > > > > > > > (even more inside)--> drm_crtc_vblank_reset that bumps the > > > > > > > refcount to > > > > > > > prevent vblank_get to enable vblank (refcount=1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. So, when we start a subtest, vblank is still disabled and in > > > > > > > commit_tail, commit_planes triggers a > > > > > > > atomic_begin/flush->vblank_get that > > > > > > > return -EINVAL because !vblank->enabled (refcount ends 1) and > > > > > > > send_vblank; > > > > > > > however the test fails before atomic_enable decrements refcount > > > > > > > to 0 and > > > > > > > reset timestamp. > > > > > > > ** This warning also appears in this very first running: > > > > > > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 708 at drivers/gpu/drm/vkms/vkms_crtc.c:91 > > > > > > > vkms_get_vblank_timestamp+0x41/0x50 [vkms] > > > > > > > > > > > > Hm yeah I guess that's something we should paper over a bit, but > > > > > > maybe > > > > > > the bugfix will take care of that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the end, this sequence modeset_disable -> atomic_begin -> > > > > > > > atomic_flush: refcount going from 0 to 1 and than > > > > > > > drm_vblank_enable > > > > > > > prepares to everything going well in the next subtest (because > > > > > > > atomic_disable is not called). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. It could be nice, but in the next subtest (with success), as > > > > > > > refcount + > > > > > > > vblank_enabled ok, after doind its job, it calls > > > > > > > atomic_disable->vblank_off and here refcount ends 1 and vblank > > > > > > > disabled > > > > > > > (the problem returns). > > > > > > > So, we have a kind of good turn and bad turn. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I tried different things, but the only relatively stable result > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > putting the sequence modeset_disable + modeset_enables + > > > > > > > commit_planes in > > > > > > > the commit_tail. That didn't convince me and then I keep trying > > > > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > This actually sounds like a good idea, I had the same one. Doing it > > > > > > this way should also resolve the WARNING you've pointed out I think? > > > > > > > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > > > > > > > My uncertainty in this idea was related to a subtest, the > > > > > cursor-suspend. > > > > > Although the reordering solves most of the blocking in > > > > > kms-cursor-crc, the > > > > > suspend subtest fails because when vkms suspends, it disables vblank, > > > > > and when it resumes, vblank is not enabled in time. In this subtest, > > > > > there is > > > > > a pipe-crc-start and adding a igt_wait_for_vblank solves... but again, > > > > > I know it is not the real fix. > > > > > > > > > > Would be the case to develop a specific feature of suspend/resume in > > > > > vkms? > > > > > I mean, something to enable vblank when resume. I am trying to figure > > > > > out how > > > > > to develop it, but still without success. > > > > > > > > Hm since it's all software I expected that the hrtimer will simply > > > > continue to run as if nothing happened. For real hw we'd need to use > > > > drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume, but for vkms I dont think > > > > that's required. Is the vblank hrtimer not working after resume? Or is > > > > it simply reporting a garbage timestamp and that's why the testcase > > > > fails? > > > > > > The testcase fails for the same timeout in waiting the first crc > > > (already applying the change in the commit_tail sequence): > > > > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_aux-DEBUG: Test requirement passed: (power_dir = > > > open("/sys/power", O_RDONLY)) >= 0 > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_aux-DEBUG: Test requirement passed: > > > get_supported_suspend_states(power_dir) & (1 << state) > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_aux-DEBUG: Test requirement passed: test == > > > SUSPEND_TEST_NONE || faccessat(power_dir, "pm_test", R_OK | W_OK, 0) == 0 > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_aux-DEBUG: Test requirement passed: !(state == > > > SUSPEND_STATE_DISK && !intel_get_total_swap_mb()) > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_aux-DEBUG: Test requirement passed: ret == 0 > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_core-INFO: [cmd] rtcwake: wakeup from "mem" > > > using /dev/rtc0 at Thu Jul 30 09:23:59 2020 > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_debugfs-DEBUG: Opening debugfs directory > > > '/sys/kernel/debug/dri/0' > > > (kms_cursor_crc:732) igt_core-INFO: Timed out: Opening crc fd, and poll > > > for first CRC. > > > > > > What I could check was, when suspend, vblanks are disabled (calling > > > vkms_disable_vblank), and when resume, the testcase fails and only after > > > the failure vblanks are enabled (vkms_enable_vblank) and > > > hrtimer_init/starts. > > > > Hm, what is disabling the vblank there? Can you grab a full backtrace for > > that? I have no idea why that's even happening ... > > > > > If I "force" enabling vblanks via testcase (adding a > > > igt_wait_for_vblank before igt_pipe_crc_start), things work fine. > > > This is why I thought about anticipating the restarting of activities by > > > placing a vblank "wakeup" in a resume function. Or perhaps prevent vblank > > > from being disabled when suspended, since that last attempt to place a > > > vblank_put at the end of the flush made this test case (suspend) work, > > > because it prevented the vblank from being disabled. > > > > > > This failure in suspend subtest is so closer to the previous ones, that I > > > was unsure if my attempt in fix by reordering commit_tail would be > > > enough. > > > But maybe they are different situations that deserve different treats. > > > Do you think restarting a vblank in resume can make sense for vkms? > > > > tbh I'm just really confused what's going on :-/ > > Hi Daniel, Mellisa. > I made up the situation Melissa said, and thought about what's going on now. > What pipe-A-cursor-suspend different from size-change is that it has some > suspend command just before disabling cursor in test. usually vblank is > enabled > by drm_vblank_get() and it's handled by vblank interrupt > (vkms_vblank_simulate > in vkms). by calling drm_crtc_handle_vblank(), drm_vblank_put() is called and > it > disable vblank with disable timer. the timer will disable vblank after 5 > seconds > (drm_vblank_offdelay) later in default. that time is enough to execute crc > command in simple size-change test. but in suspending situation, if suspend > and > wakup command takes more than 5 seconds, vblank will disabled and also crc > command is failed from polling crc file. the test are passed if I make my > environment wake up earlier.
Oh, nice! I tested what you say extending the offdelay, and the test goes well. But what would be the right way to fix? Melissa > In the same way, if there is the code delaying crc command in igt test, it > make > same problem even if it's in simple size-change. > > -Sidong > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > Melissa > > > > > > > > Not sure how to wire it up for fake drivers like vkms, but maybe doing > > > > the suspend/resume like for real drivers helps. I think ideally we'd > > > > try to attach a platform driver to our platform device we create (but > > > > not sure how to do that). > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Melissa > > > > > > > > > > > > But I'm still wondering why after step 3 we don't get -EINVAL from > > > > > > vblank_get() - after vblank_off() vblank->enabled should be false > > > > > > again, getting us back to the same state as after 1. Is that not > > > > > > happening? > > > > > > -Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > -Sidong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crtc->state->event = NULL; > > > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.27.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Daniel Vetter > > > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > > > > > > > > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Daniel Vetter > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > > > > > > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > > > > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Daniel Vetter > > > > > > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > > > > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Daniel Vetter > > > > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Daniel Vetter > > > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > > > http://blog.ffwll.ch > > > > -- > > Daniel Vetter > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > > http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel