Re: [BUG?] INFO: rcu_sched detected expedited stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0-.... } 3 jiffies s: 309 root: 0x1/.

2023-04-14 Thread Rui Salvaterra
Hi, Paul, On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 17:21, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Been there, done that! > > And actually, it is kind of reassuring that the Linux kernel avoids > tens-of-milliseocnds latency blows in the common case on your system. Especially since we're talking about a HZ=100 non-preemptive

Re: [BUG?] INFO: rcu_sched detected expedited stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0-.... } 3 jiffies s: 309 root: 0x1/.

2023-04-14 Thread Rui Salvaterra
Hi, Paul, On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 15:43, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > My guess would be that you have CONFIG_RCU_EXP_CPU_STALL_TIMEOUT set to > some small non-zero number, for example, you might have set up a recent > Android .config or some such. The default of zero would give you about > 21

Re: [BUG?] INFO: rcu_sched detected expedited stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0-.... } 3 jiffies s: 309 root: 0x1/.

2023-04-13 Thread Rui Salvaterra
Hi, Jani, On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 at 10:28, Jani Nikula wrote: > > Please file a bug at fdo gitlab [1]. Add drm.debug=0xe and maybe > log_buf_len=4M or similar kernel parameters, and attach dmesg all the > way from boot to reproducing the problem. Sure, will do, thanks! > How long is "for some

[BUG?] INFO: rcu_sched detected expedited stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0-.... } 3 jiffies s: 309 root: 0x1/.

2023-04-13 Thread Rui Salvaterra
Hi, everyone, I apologise in advance if I've sent this to {too many, the wrong} people. For some time now, I've been getting sporadic (in about one out of five boots) DRM-related RCU complaints on an Ivy Bridge-based (Core i7-3720QM) Mac Mini. Call trace (on Linux 6.3-rc6) follows: [

Re: [BUG?] INFO: rcu_sched detected expedited stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 0-.... } 3 jiffies s: 309 root: 0x1/.

2023-04-13 Thread Rui Salvaterra
Hi again, everyone. So, while preparing to file the bug report with the requested information, I got a trace completely unrelated to DRM (on a swapon call, it seems). [4.868340] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched detected expedited stalls on CPUs/tasks: { 4- } 3 jiffies s: 265 root: 0x10/. [

Re: [RFC] Deprecate AGP GART support for Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-22 Thread Rui Salvaterra
Hi, Christian, On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 16:00, Christian König wrote: > > So I've used an ancient system (32bit) to setup a test box for this. > > > The first GPU I could test is an RV280 (Radeon 9200 PRO) which is easily > 15 years old. Oh, I have one of those in box somewhere, but no AGP

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-15 Thread Rui Salvaterra
On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 14:44, Christian Zigotzky wrote: > > OpenGL version string: 1.5 Mesa 7.6 > OpenGL version string: 1.3 Mesa 7.2 > > Screenshots: > > - http://www.supertuxkart.de/stk07ubuntu910ppc.png > - http://www.supertuxkart.de/opensuse111-stk073.jpg Those are *extremely old* (and I

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-15 Thread Rui Salvaterra
On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 11:58, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > How do you know you're hitting that particular issue? Sorry, somehow I misread that. I was still thinking of the AGP hangs. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-15 Thread Rui Salvaterra
On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 08:19, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > i915 is even worse, we manually mess around with clflush. In > userspace. So really there's 2 axis for dma memory: coherent vs. > non-coherent (which is something the dma-api somewhat exposed), i.e. > do you need to clflush or not, and cached

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-15 Thread Rui Salvaterra
On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 11:27, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > The only theoretical problem there was that the kernel still had a > cacheable mapping of the same memory, and any access via that (e.g. > prefetch due to access to a neighbouring page) could trigger a machine > check. But I don't remember

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-13 Thread Rui Salvaterra
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 08:58, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > FWIW, on my last-generation PowerBook with RV350 (IIRC), there was a big > performance difference between AGP and PCI GART. The latter was sort of > usable for normal desktop operation, but not so much for OpenGL apps > (which were usable

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-13 Thread Rui Salvaterra
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 17:38, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Otherwise all agree, agp is a mighty mess and essentially just > crapshot outside of x86. It kinda worked for the much more static > allocations for dri1, but with in-kernel memory managers all the cache > flushing issues showed up big time

Re: [RFC] Remove AGP support from Radeon/Nouveau/TTM

2020-05-11 Thread Rui Salvaterra
A segunda, 11/05/2020, 21:21, Alex Deucher escreveu: > > > Note there is no loss of functionality here, at least on radeon > hardware. It just comes down to which MMU gets used for access to > system memory, the AGP MMU on the chipset or the MMU built into the > GPU. On powerpc hardware, AGP