On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:17:34 +1100
Alistair Popple <alist...@popple.id.au> wrote:
> When sending TLB invalidates to the NPU we need to send extra flushes due
> to a hardware issue. The original implementation would lock the all the
> ATSD MMIO registers sequentially before unlocking and relocking each of
> them sequentially to do the extra flush.
>
> This introduced a deadlock as it is possible for one thread to hold one
> ATSD register whilst waiting for another register to be freed while the
> other thread is holding that register waiting for the one in the first
> thread to be freed.
>
> For example if there are two threads and two ATSD registers:
>
> Thread A Thread B
> Acquire 1
> Acquire 2
> Release 1 Acquire 1
> Wait 1 Wait 2
>
> Both threads will be stuck waiting to acquire a register resulting in an
> RCU stall warning or soft lockup.
>
> This patch solves the deadlock by refactoring the code to ensure registers
> are not released between flushes and to ensure all registers are either
> acquired or released together and in order.
>
> Fixes: bbd5ff50afff ("powerpc/powernv/npu-dma: Add explicit flush when
> sending an ATSD")
> Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple <alist...@popple.id.au>
> ---
>
> Michael,
>
> This should probalby go to stable as well, although it's bigger than the 100
> line limit mentioned in the stable kernel rules.
>
> - Alistair
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c | 195
> +++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 109 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c
> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c
> index fb0a6dee9bce..5746b456dfa4 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c
> @@ -408,6 +408,11 @@ struct npu_context {
> void *priv;
> };
>
> +struct mmio_atsd_reg {
> + struct npu *npu;
> + int reg;
> +};
> +
Is it just easier to move reg to inside of struct npu?
> /*
> * Find a free MMIO ATSD register and mark it in use. Return -ENOSPC
> * if none are available.
> @@ -433,79 +438,83 @@ static void put_mmio_atsd_reg(struct npu *npu, int reg)
> #define XTS_ATSD_AVA 1
> #define XTS_ATSD_STAT 2
>
> -static int mmio_launch_invalidate(struct npu *npu, unsigned long launch,
> - unsigned long va)
> +static void mmio_launch_invalidate(struct mmio_atsd_reg *mmio_atsd_reg,
> + unsigned long launch, unsigned long va)
> {
> - int mmio_atsd_reg;
> -
> - do {
> - mmio_atsd_reg = get_mmio_atsd_reg(npu);
> - cpu_relax();
> - } while (mmio_atsd_reg < 0);
> + struct npu *npu = mmio_atsd_reg->npu;
> + int reg = mmio_atsd_reg->reg;
>
> __raw_writeq(cpu_to_be64(va),
> - npu->mmio_atsd_regs[mmio_atsd_reg] + XTS_ATSD_AVA);
> + npu->mmio_atsd_regs[reg] + XTS_ATSD_AVA);
> eieio();
> - __raw_writeq(cpu_to_be64(launch), npu->mmio_atsd_regs[mmio_atsd_reg]);
> -
> - return mmio_atsd_reg;
> + __raw_writeq(cpu_to_be64(launch), npu->mmio_atsd_regs[reg]);
> }
>
> -static int mmio_invalidate_pid(struct npu *npu, unsigned long pid, bool
> flush)
> +static void mmio_invalidate_pid(struct mmio_atsd_reg
> mmio_atsd_reg[NV_MAX_NPUS],
> + unsigned long pid, bool flush)
> {
> + int i;
> unsigned long launch;
>
> - /* IS set to invalidate matching PID */
> - launch = PPC_BIT(12);
> + for (i = 0; i <= max_npu2_index; i++) {
> + if (mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg < 0)
> + continue;
>
> - /* PRS set to process-scoped */
> - launch |= PPC_BIT(13);
> + /* IS set to invalidate matching PID */
> + launch = PPC_BIT(12);
>
> - /* AP */
> - launch |= (u64) mmu_get_ap(mmu_virtual_psize) << PPC_BITLSHIFT(17);
> + /* PRS set to process-scoped */
> + launch |= PPC_BIT(13);
>
> - /* PID */
> - launch |= pid << PPC_BITLSHIFT(38);
> + /* AP */
> + launch |= (u64)
> + mmu_get_ap(mmu_virtual_psize) << PPC_BITLSHIFT(17);
>
> - /* No flush */
> - launch |= !flush << PPC_BITLSHIFT(39);
> + /* PID */
> + launch |= pid << PPC_BITLSHIFT(38);
>
> - /* Invalidating the entire process doesn't use a va */
> - return mmio_launch_invalidate(npu, launch, 0);
> + /* No flush */
> + launch |= !flush << PPC_BITLSHIFT(39);
> +
> + /* Invalidating the entire process doesn't use a va */
> + mmio_launch_invalidate(&mmio_atsd_reg[i], launch, 0);
> + }
> }
>
> -static int mmio_invalidate_va(struct npu *npu, unsigned long va,
> - unsigned long pid, bool flush)
> +static void mmio_invalidate_va(struct mmio_atsd_reg
> mmio_atsd_reg[NV_MAX_NPUS],
> + unsigned long va, unsigned long pid, bool flush)
> {
> + int i;
> unsigned long launch;
>
> - /* IS set to invalidate target VA */
> - launch = 0;
> + for (i = 0; i <= max_npu2_index; i++) {
> + if (mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg < 0)
> + continue;
> +
> + /* IS set to invalidate target VA */
> + launch = 0;
>
> - /* PRS set to process scoped */
> - launch |= PPC_BIT(13);
> + /* PRS set to process scoped */
> + launch |= PPC_BIT(13);
>
> - /* AP */
> - launch |= (u64) mmu_get_ap(mmu_virtual_psize) << PPC_BITLSHIFT(17);
> + /* AP */
> + launch |= (u64)
> + mmu_get_ap(mmu_virtual_psize) << PPC_BITLSHIFT(17);
>
> - /* PID */
> - launch |= pid << PPC_BITLSHIFT(38);
> + /* PID */
> + launch |= pid << PPC_BITLSHIFT(38);
>
> - /* No flush */
> - launch |= !flush << PPC_BITLSHIFT(39);
> + /* No flush */
> + launch |= !flush << PPC_BITLSHIFT(39);
>
> - return mmio_launch_invalidate(npu, launch, va);
> + mmio_launch_invalidate(&mmio_atsd_reg[i], launch, va);
> + }
> }
>
> #define mn_to_npu_context(x) container_of(x, struct npu_context, mn)
>
> -struct mmio_atsd_reg {
> - struct npu *npu;
> - int reg;
> -};
> -
> static void mmio_invalidate_wait(
> - struct mmio_atsd_reg mmio_atsd_reg[NV_MAX_NPUS], bool flush)
> + struct mmio_atsd_reg mmio_atsd_reg[NV_MAX_NPUS])
> {
> struct npu *npu;
> int i, reg;
> @@ -520,16 +529,46 @@ static void mmio_invalidate_wait(
> reg = mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg;
> while (__raw_readq(npu->mmio_atsd_regs[reg] + XTS_ATSD_STAT))
> cpu_relax();
> + }
> +}
>
> - put_mmio_atsd_reg(npu, reg);
> +static void acquire_atsd_reg(struct npu_context *npu_context,
> + struct mmio_atsd_reg mmio_atsd_reg[NV_MAX_NPUS])
> +{
> + int i, j;
> + struct npu *npu;
> + struct pci_dev *npdev;
> + struct pnv_phb *nphb;
>
> - /*
> - * The GPU requires two flush ATSDs to ensure all entries have
> - * been flushed. We use PID 0 as it will never be used for a
> - * process on the GPU.
> - */
> - if (flush)
> - mmio_invalidate_pid(npu, 0, true);
> + for (i = 0; i <= max_npu2_index; i++) {
> + mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg = -1;
> + for (j = 0; j < NV_MAX_LINKS; j++) {
Is it safe to assume that npu_context->npdev will not change in this
loop? I guess it would need to be stronger than just this loop.
> + npdev = npu_context->npdev[i][j];
> + if (!npdev)
> + continue;
> +
> + nphb = pci_bus_to_host(npdev->bus)->private_data;
> + npu = &nphb->npu;
> + mmio_atsd_reg[i].npu = npu;
> + mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg = get_mmio_atsd_reg(npu);
> + while (mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg < 0) {
> + mmio_atsd_reg[i].reg = get_mmio_atsd_reg(npu);
> + cpu_relax();
A cond_resched() as well if we have too many tries?
Balbir
