[AMD Official Use Only]
>>> I'm not sure if the work_tdr is initialized when a maximum timeout is
>>> specified. Please double check.
Even timeout set to max the work_tdr is still initialized:
int drm_sched_init(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched,
const struct drm_sched_backend_ops *ops,
unsigned hw_submission, unsigned hang_limit, long timeout,
atomic_t *score, const char *name)
{
int i, ret;
sched->ops = ops;
sched->hw_submission_limit = hw_submission;
sched->name = name;
sched->timeout = timeout;
sched->hang_limit = hang_limit;
sched->score = score ? score : &sched->_score;
for (i = DRM_SCHED_PRIORITY_MIN; i < DRM_SCHED_PRIORITY_COUNT; i++)
drm_sched_rq_init(sched, &sched->sched_rq[i]);
init_waitqueue_head(&sched->wake_up_worker);
init_waitqueue_head(&sched->job_scheduled);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sched->pending_list);
spin_lock_init(&sched->job_list_lock);
atomic_set(&sched->hw_rq_count, 0);
INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&sched->work_tdr, drm_sched_job_timedout);
atomic_set(&sched->_score, 0);
atomic64_set(&sched->job_id_count, 0);
Thanks
------------------------------------------
Monk Liu | Cloud-GPU Core team
------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumer...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2021 8:38 PM
To: Liu, Monk <monk....@amd.com>; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/sched: fix the bug of time out calculation(v3)
Am 26.08.21 um 13:55 schrieb Liu, Monk:
> [AMD Official Use Only]
>
>>> I'm not sure if the work_tdr is initialized when a maximum timeout is
>>> specified. Please double check.
> Ok, will do
>
>>> BTW: Can we please drop the "tdr" naming from the scheduler? That is just a
>>> timeout functionality and not related to recovery in any way.
> We even do not start hardware recovery in a lot of cases now (when wave kill
> is successfully).
>
> Umm, sounds reasonable, I can rename it to "to" with another patch
Maybe more like job_timeout or timeout_work or something into that direction.
Christian.
>
> Thanks
>
> ------------------------------------------
> Monk Liu | Cloud-GPU Core team
> ------------------------------------------
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumer...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2021 6:09 PM
> To: Liu, Monk <monk....@amd.com>; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/sched: fix the bug of time out
> calculation(v3)
>
> Am 26.08.21 um 06:55 schrieb Monk Liu:
>> issue:
>> in cleanup_job the cancle_delayed_work will cancel a TO timer even
>> the its corresponding job is still running.
> Yeah, that makes a lot more sense.
>
>> fix:
>> do not cancel the timer in cleanup_job, instead do the cancelling
>> only when the heading job is signaled, and if there is a "next" job
>> we start_timeout again.
>>
>> v2:
>> further cleanup the logic, and do the TDR timer cancelling if the
>> signaled job is the last one in its scheduler.
>>
>> v3:
>> change the issue description
>> remove the cancel_delayed_work in the begining of the cleanup_job
>> recover the implement of drm_sched_job_begin.
>>
>> TODO:
>> 1)introduce pause/resume scheduler in job_timeout to serial the
>> handling of scheduler and job_timeout.
>> 2)drop the bad job's del and insert in scheduler due to above
>> serialization (no race issue anymore with the serialization)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Monk Liu <monk....@amd.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c | 25 ++++++++++---------------
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> index a2a9536..ecf8140 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>> @@ -676,13 +676,7 @@ drm_sched_get_cleanup_job(struct drm_gpu_scheduler
>> *sched)
>> {
>> struct drm_sched_job *job, *next;
>>
>> - /*
>> - * Don't destroy jobs while the timeout worker is running OR thread
>> - * is being parked and hence assumed to not touch pending_list
>> - */
>> - if ((sched->timeout != MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT &&
>> - !cancel_delayed_work(&sched->work_tdr)) ||
>> - kthread_should_park())
>> + if (kthread_should_park())
>> return NULL;
>>
>> spin_lock(&sched->job_list_lock); @@ -693,17 +687,21 @@
>> drm_sched_get_cleanup_job(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched)
>> if (job && dma_fence_is_signaled(&job->s_fence->finished)) {
>> /* remove job from pending_list */
>> list_del_init(&job->list);
>> +
>> + /* cancel this job's TO timer */
>> + cancel_delayed_work(&sched->work_tdr);
> I'm not sure if the work_tdr is initialized when a maximum timeout is
> specified. Please double check.
>
> BTW: Can we please drop the "tdr" naming from the scheduler? That is just a
> timeout functionality and not related to recovery in any way.
>
> We even do not start hardware recovery in a lot of cases now (when wave kill
> is successfully).
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
>> /* make the scheduled timestamp more accurate */
>> next = list_first_entry_or_null(&sched->pending_list,
>> typeof(*next), list);
>> - if (next)
>> +
>> + if (next) {
>> next->s_fence->scheduled.timestamp =
>> job->s_fence->finished.timestamp;
>> -
>> + /* start TO timer for next job */
>> + drm_sched_start_timeout(sched);
>> + }
>> } else {
>> job = NULL;
>> - /* queue timeout for next job */
>> - drm_sched_start_timeout(sched);
>> }
>>
>> spin_unlock(&sched->job_list_lock);
>> @@ -791,11 +789,8 @@ static int drm_sched_main(void *param)
>> (entity =
>> drm_sched_select_entity(sched))) ||
>> kthread_should_stop());
>>
>> - if (cleanup_job) {
>> + if (cleanup_job)
>> sched->ops->free_job(cleanup_job);
>> - /* queue timeout for next job */
>> - drm_sched_start_timeout(sched);
>> - }
>>
>> if (!entity)
>> continue;
