Good questions.   @Pingfan Liu  @Ville Syrjälä

Driver-wise,  no other access except for pxp stuff,  for that after disabling 
PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY,  any access will cause MMIO failure,  they will not be able 
to be hidden.
And the invalid access is not from pxp,  otherwise just doing   intel_pxp_fini  
 in i915_driver_shutdown will fix the issue, it might come from firmware or 
other that i915 driver can't see.  

Current solution is defensive,  not harmful just like turning on write 
protection on a floppy disk when not using it.

Thanks,
Jia

-----Original Message-----
From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> 
Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2025 9:16 AM
To: Yao, Jia <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Zuo, Alex <[email protected]>; Lin, 
Shuicheng <[email protected]>; Askar Safin <[email protected]>; 
Pingfan Liu <[email protected]>; Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Setting/clearing the memory access bit when 
en/disabling i915

On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 04:06:39PM +0000, Yao, Jia wrote:
> The actual bug is showing in 
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/14598
> if CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU_DEFAULT_ON=y  ,  that IOMMU prevent the invalid access, 
>  but if  CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU_DEFAULT_ON=n,   the invalid access will directly 
> cause system crash after kexec reboot.

I was asking you whether that invalid access was caused by that pxp stuff or 
not?

If yes, then just fix it.

If not, then I guess someone needs to keep on debugging.

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2025 5:22 AM
> To: Yao, Jia <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; Zuo, Alex <[email protected]>; 
> Lin, Shuicheng <[email protected]>; Askar Safin 
> <[email protected]>; Pingfan Liu <[email protected]>; Chris Wilson 
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Setting/clearing the memory access 
> bit when en/disabling i915
> 
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 09:40:45PM +0000, Yao, Jia wrote:
> > You mean  intel_pxp_fini(i915)  ?
> > This is because mei_me_shutdown  is called after 
> > i915_driver_shutdown in pci_device_shutdown sequence.  If we don't 
> > close pxp in advance, it will cause
> > 
> > [  295.584775] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* gt: MMIO unreliable 
> > (forcewake register returns 0xFFFFFFFF)!
> 
> So that is the actual bug you're trying to fix? Please just submit the pxp 
> fix on its own.
> 
> > 
> > Since we disabled PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY in  i915_driver_shutdown
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Jia
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 2:25 PM
> > To: Yao, Jia <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; Zuo, Alex <[email protected]>; 
> > Lin, Shuicheng <[email protected]>; Askar Safin 
> > <[email protected]>; Pingfan Liu <[email protected]>; Chris Wilson 
> > <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Setting/clearing the memory access 
> > bit when en/disabling i915
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 08:25:14PM +0000, Jia Yao wrote:
> > > Make i915's PCI device management more robust by always 
> > > setting/clearing the memory access bit when enabling/disabling the 
> > > device, and by consolidating this logic into helper functions.
> > > 
> > > It fixes kexec reboot issue by disabling memory access before 
> > > shutting down the device, which can block unsafe and unwanted access from 
> > > DMA.
> > > 
> > > v2:
> > >   - follow brace style
> > > 
> > > Link: 
> > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/14598
> > > Cc: Alex Zuo <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Shuicheng Lin <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Askar Safin <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Pingfan Liu <[email protected]>
> > > Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jia Yao <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c | 35
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
> > > index b46cb54ef5dc..766f85726b67 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
> > > @@ -118,6 +118,33 @@
> > >  
> > >  static const struct drm_driver i915_drm_driver;
> > >  
> > > +static int i915_enable_device(struct pci_dev *pdev) {
> > > + u32 cmd;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + ret = pci_enable_device(pdev);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > +         return ret;
> > > +
> > > + pci_read_config_dword(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, &cmd);
> > > + if (!(cmd & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY))
> > > +         pci_write_config_dword(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, cmd | 
> > > +PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY);
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > 
> > NAK. If the pci code is broken then fix the problem there.
> > Do not add ugly hacks into random drivers.
> > 
> > > +
> > > +static void i915_disable_device(struct pci_dev *pdev) {
> > > + u32 cmd;
> > > +
> > > + pci_read_config_dword(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, &cmd);
> > > + if (cmd & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY)
> > > +         pci_write_config_dword(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, cmd & 
> > > +~PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY);
> > > +
> > > + pci_disable_device(pdev);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static int i915_workqueues_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)  {
> > >   /*
> > > @@ -788,7 +815,7 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const 
> > > struct pci_device_id *ent)
> > >   struct intel_display *display;
> > >   int ret;
> > >  
> > > - ret = pci_enable_device(pdev);
> > > + ret = i915_enable_device(pdev);
> > >   if (ret) {
> > >           pr_err("Failed to enable graphics device: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(ret));
> > >           return ret;
> > > @@ -796,7 +823,7 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, 
> > > const struct pci_device_id *ent)
> > >  
> > >   i915 = i915_driver_create(pdev, ent);
> > >   if (IS_ERR(i915)) {
> > > -         pci_disable_device(pdev);
> > > +         i915_disable_device(pdev);
> > >           return PTR_ERR(i915);
> > >   }
> > >  
> > > @@ -885,7 +912,7 @@ int i915_driver_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const 
> > > struct pci_device_id *ent)
> > >   enable_rpm_wakeref_asserts(&i915->runtime_pm);
> > >   i915_driver_late_release(i915);
> > >  out_pci_disable:
> > > - pci_disable_device(pdev);
> > > + i915_disable_device(pdev);
> > >   i915_probe_error(i915, "Device initialization failed (%d)\n", ret);
> > >   return ret;
> > >  }
> > > @@ -1003,6 +1030,7 @@ void i915_driver_shutdown(struct 
> > > drm_i915_private *i915)
> > >  
> > >   intel_dmc_suspend(display);
> > >  
> > > + intel_pxp_fini(i915);
> > 
> > What is that doing in this patch?
> > 
> > >   i915_gem_suspend(i915);
> > >  
> > >   /*
> > > @@ -1020,6 +1048,7 @@ void i915_driver_shutdown(struct drm_i915_private 
> > > *i915)
> > >   enable_rpm_wakeref_asserts(&i915->runtime_pm);
> > >  
> > >   intel_runtime_pm_driver_last_release(&i915->runtime_pm);
> > > + i915_disable_device(to_pci_dev(i915->drm.dev));
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  static bool suspend_to_idle(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
> > 
> > --
> > Ville Syrjälä
> > Intel
> 
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel

--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel

Reply via email to