search for: wake_up_all

...need to call fence_signal() at all? The interrupts at least on radeon are way to unreliable for such a thing. Can enable_signalling fail? What's the reason for fence_signaled() in the first place? > It doesn't need to be completely reliable, or finish immediately. > > And any time wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue) is called all the fences that were enabled will be rechecked. I raised this already somewhere else, but should we have some common infrastructure in the core fence code to recheck fences periodically? radeon doesn't seem to be the only hw where this isn't reliabl...

...al() at all? The interrupts at least on radeon are way to unreliable for such a thing. Can enable_signalling fail? What's the reason for fence_signaled() in the first place? >>> It doesn't need to be completely reliable, or finish immediately. >>> >>> And any time wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue) is called all the fences that were enabled will be rechecked. >> I raised this already somewhere else, but should we have some common >> infrastructure in the core fence code to recheck fences periodically? >> radeon doesn't seem to be the only hw wh...

...line: > > The rtnl_unlock can move up a line too. My editor is failing me on > this. > >>> + /* >>> + * TODO: Since we already have a spinlock above, this would be faster >>> + * as wake_up_q >>> + */ >>> + if (need_wake) >>> + wake_up_all(&mmn_mm->wq); >> >> So why is this important enough for a TODO comment, but not important >> enough to do right away? > > Lets drop the comment, I'm noto sure wake_up_q is even a function this > layer should be calling. Actually, I think you can remove the &q...

...radeon_fence_driver *fence_drv; + struct radeon_device *rdev; + unsigned long iring; + + fence_drv = container_of(work, struct radeon_fence_driver, fence_check_work.work); + rdev = fence_drv->rdev; + iring = fence_drv - &rdev->fence_drv[0]; + + if (__radeon_fence_process(rdev, iring)) + wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue); + else if (radeon_ring_is_lockup(rdev, iring, &rdev->ring[iring])) { + /* good news we believe it's a lockup */ + dev_warn(rdev->dev, "GPU lockup (current fence id " + "0x%016llx last fence id 0x%016llx on ring %ld)\n", + (uint64...

...EUE_HEAD(rng_done); > static unsigned short current_quality; > static unsigned short default_quality; /* = 0; default to "off" */ > > @@ -98,6 +99,7 @@ static inline void cleanup_rng(struct kref *kref) > > if (rng->cleanup) > rng->cleanup(rng); > + wake_up_all(&rng_done); > } > > static void set_current_rng(struct hwrng *rng) > @@ -529,6 +531,9 @@ void hwrng_unregister(struct hwrng *rng) > } > > mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex); > + > + /* Just in case rng is reading right now, wait. */ > + wait_event(rng_done, ato...

...EUE_HEAD(rng_done); > static unsigned short current_quality; > static unsigned short default_quality; /* = 0; default to "off" */ > > @@ -98,6 +99,7 @@ static inline void cleanup_rng(struct kref *kref) > > if (rng->cleanup) > rng->cleanup(rng); > + wake_up_all(&rng_done); > } > > static void set_current_rng(struct hwrng *rng) > @@ -529,6 +531,9 @@ void hwrng_unregister(struct hwrng *rng) > } > > mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex); > + > + /* Just in case rng is reading right now, wait. */ > + wait_event(rng_done, ato...

...t radeon_device *rdev; > + unsigned long iring; > + > + fence_drv = container_of(work, struct radeon_fence_driver, fence_check_work.work); > + rdev = fence_drv->rdev; > + iring = fence_drv - &rdev->fence_drv[0]; > + > + if (__radeon_fence_process(rdev, iring)) > + wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue); > + else if (radeon_ring_is_lockup(rdev, iring, &rdev->ring[iring])) { > + /* good news we believe it's a lockup */ > + dev_warn(rdev->dev, "GPU lockup (current fence id " > + "0x%016llx last fence id 0x%016llx on ring %ld)\n...

...pens then * they are progressed. This arrangement for tree updates is used to * avoid using a blocking lock during invalidate_range_start. */ > + /* > + * TODO: Since we already have a spinlock above, this would be faster > + * as wake_up_q > + */ > + if (need_wake) > + wake_up_all(&mmn_mm->wq); So why is this important enough for a TODO comment, but not important enough to do right away? > + * release semantics on the initialization of the mmu_notifier_mm's > + * contents are provided for unlocked readers. acquire can only be > + * use...

...E_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(rng_done); static unsigned short current_quality; static unsigned short default_quality; /* = 0; default to "off" */ @@ -98,6 +99,8 @@ static inline void cleanup_rng(struct kref *kref) if (rng->cleanup) rng->cleanup(rng); + rng->cleanup_done = true; + wake_up_all(&rng_done); } static void set_current_rng(struct hwrng *rng) @@ -536,6 +539,11 @@ void hwrng_unregister(struct hwrng *rng) kthread_stop(hwrng_fill); } else mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex); + + /* Just in case rng is reading right now, wait. */ + wait_event(rng_done, rng->cleanup_do...

...E_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(rng_done); static unsigned short current_quality; static unsigned short default_quality; /* = 0; default to "off" */ @@ -98,6 +99,8 @@ static inline void cleanup_rng(struct kref *kref) if (rng->cleanup) rng->cleanup(rng); + rng->cleanup_done = true; + wake_up_all(&rng_done); } static void set_current_rng(struct hwrng *rng) @@ -536,6 +539,11 @@ void hwrng_unregister(struct hwrng *rng) kthread_stop(hwrng_fill); } else mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex); + + /* Just in case rng is reading right now, wait. */ + wait_event(rng_done, rng->cleanup_do...

...au_fence_priv *priv; -}; - static int -nouveau_fence_wait_uevent_handler(struct nouveau_eventh *event, int index) +nouveau_fence_wait_uevent_handler(struct nouveau_eventh *handler, int index) { - struct nouveau_fence_uevent *uevent = - container_of(event, struct nouveau_fence_uevent, handler); - wake_up_all(&uevent->priv->waiting); + struct nouveau_fence_priv *priv = handler->priv; + wake_up_all(&priv->waiting); return NVKM_EVENT_KEEP; } @@ -186,13 +180,13 @@ nouveau_fence_wait_uevent(struct nouveau_fence *fence, bool intr) struct nouveau_channel *chan = fence->channel;...

...om that the whole approach looks like a really bad idea to >> me. How for example is lockup detection supposed to happen with this? > It's not a race condition because fence_queue.lock is held when this > function is called. Ah, I see. That's also the reason why you moved the wake_up_all out of the processing function. > > Lockup's a bit of a weird problem, the changes wouldn't allow core ttm > code to handle the lockup any more, > but any driver specific wait code would still handle this. I did this > by design, because in future patches the wait > fu...

...drm_vblank_work_schedule() are blocked from attempting to schedule while we're in the middle of enabling/disabling vblanks. * Move drm_handle_vblank_works() call below drm_handle_vblank_events() * Simplify drm_vblank_work_cancel_sync() * Fix drm_vblank_work_cancel_sync() documentation * Move wake_up_all() calls out of spinlock where we can. The only one I left was the call to wake_up_all() in drm_vblank_handle_works() as this seemed like it made more sense just living in that function (which is all technically under lock) * Move drm_vblank_work related functions into their own source files *...

...t;dev, "GPU reset failed\n"); > } > > - up_write(&rdev->exclusive_lock); > + /* > + * force all waiters to recheck, some may have been > + * added while the exclusive_lock was unavailable > + */ > + downgrade_write(&rdev->exclusive_lock); > + wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue); > + up_read(&rdev->exclusive_lock); > return r; > } > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > index 6435719fd45b..81c98f6ff0ca 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c...

...; > static unsigned int drm_timestamp_precision = 20; /* Default to 20 usecs. */ > > @@ -440,6 +443,9 @@ void drm_vblank_cleanup(struct drm_device *dev) > drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_MODESET)); > > del_timer_sync(&vblank->disable_timer); > + > + wake_up_all(&vblank->vblank_work.work_wait); > + kthread_stop(vblank->vblank_work.thread); > } > > kfree(dev->vblank); > @@ -447,6 +453,108 @@ void drm_vblank_cleanup(struct drm_device *dev) > dev->num_crtcs = 0; > } > > +static int vblank_work_thread(void...

...mutex_lock(&mgr->qlock); - txmsg->state = DRM_DP_SIDEBAND_TX_RX; - mstb->tx_slots[slot] = NULL; - mutex_unlock(&mgr->qlock); + mutex_lock(&mgr->qlock); + txmsg->state = DRM_DP_SIDEBAND_TX_RX; + mstb->tx_slots[slot] = NULL; + mutex_unlock(&mgr->qlock); - wake_up_all(&mgr->tx_waitq); - } - return ret; + wake_up_all(&mgr->tx_waitq); + + return 0; + +no_msg: + drm_dp_mst_topology_put_mstb(mstb); +clear_down_rep_recv: + memset(&mgr->down_rep_recv, 0, sizeof(struct drm_dp_sideband_msg_rx)); + + return 0; } static int drm_dp_mst_handle_up_re...

...(mstb->tx_slots[1]) { > - mstb->tx_slots[1]->state = DRM_DP_SIDEBAND_TX_TIMEOUT; > - mstb->tx_slots[1] = NULL; > - wake_tx = true; > - } > - mutex_unlock(&mstb->mgr->qlock); > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&mstb->destroy_next); > > - if (wake_tx) > - wake_up_all(&mstb->mgr->tx_waitq); > - > - drm_dp_mst_put_mstb_malloc(mstb); > + /* > + * This can get called under mgr->mutex, so we need to perform the > + * actual destruction of the mstb in another worker > + */ > + mutex_lock(&mgr->delayed_destroy_lock); > +...

...ruct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe); static unsigned int drm_timestamp_precision = 20; /* Default to 20 usecs. */ @@ -440,6 +443,9 @@ void drm_vblank_cleanup(struct drm_device *dev) drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_MODESET)); del_timer_sync(&vblank->disable_timer); + + wake_up_all(&vblank->vblank_work.work_wait); + kthread_stop(vblank->vblank_work.thread); } kfree(dev->vblank); @@ -447,6 +453,108 @@ void drm_vblank_cleanup(struct drm_device *dev) dev->num_crtcs = 0; } +static int vblank_work_thread(void *data) +{ + struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank =...

...amp;vblank->pending_work, node) { + drm_vblank_put(vblank->dev, vblank->pipe); + list_del(&work->node); + + if (!--work->pending) { + write_seqcount_invalidate(&work->seqcount); + wake = true; + } + } + + spin_unlock_irq(&vblank->work_lock); + + if (wake) + wake_up_all(&vblank->work_wait_queue); + kthread_destroy_worker(worker); +} + static void drm_vblank_init_release(struct drm_device *dev, void *ptr) { struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = ptr; @@ -497,9 +530,66 @@ static void drm_vblank_init_release(struct drm_device *dev, void *ptr) drm_WARN_ON(dev,...

...ell it to userspace ? */ dev_info(rdev->dev, "GPU reset failed\n"); } - up_write(&rdev->exclusive_lock); + /* + * force all waiters to recheck, some may have been + * added while the exclusive_lock was unavailable + */ + downgrade_write(&rdev->exclusive_lock); + wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue); + up_read(&rdev->exclusive_lock); return r; } diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c index 6435719fd45b..81c98f6ff0ca 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fe...