Hi John, On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 01:02:16PM -0800, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote: > From: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com> > > The context persistence code does things like send super high priority > heartbeat pulses to ensure any leaked context can still be pre-empted > and thus isn't a total denial of service but only a minor denial of > service. Unfortunately, it wasn't bothering to restart the heatbeat
/heatbeat/heartbeat/ > worker with a fresh timeout. Thus, if a persistent context happened to > be closed just before the heartbeat was going to go ping anyway then > the forced pulse would get a negligble execution time. And as the > forced pulse is super high priority, the worker thread's next step is > a reset. Which means a potentially innocent system randomly goes boom > when attempting to close a context. So, force a re-schedule of the > worker thread with the appropriate timeout. > > Signed-off-by: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_heartbeat.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_heartbeat.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_heartbeat.c > index 1a8e2b7db0138..4ae2fa0b61dd4 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_heartbeat.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_heartbeat.c > @@ -290,6 +290,9 @@ static int __intel_engine_pulse(struct intel_engine_cs > *engine) > heartbeat_commit(rq, &attr); > GEM_BUG_ON(rq->sched.attr.priority < I915_PRIORITY_BARRIER); > > + /* Ensure the forced pulse gets a full period to execute */ > + next_heartbeat(engine); I think it makes sense to have this extra heardbeat here and, as I've been mulling over it, I don't any harm. The failure doesn't look related, either. Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.sh...@linux.intel.com> Thanks, Andi > return 0; > } > > -- > 2.43.0
