From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Bryce Harrington <bryce@canonical.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] [RFC] DRM locking issues during early open
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:55:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120419095516.595649b3@jbarnes-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPM=9txduppN_R9brXm8haattUn=jEOvQUaynN-vgxNerD7qUw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:52:39 +0100
Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 05:30:03PM +0100, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>> > We have been carrying a (rather poor) patch for an issue we identified in
> >>> > the DRM driver. This issue is triggered when a DRM device is initialising
> >>> > and userspace attempts to open it, typically in response to the sysfs
> >>> > device added event. Basically we allocate the minor numbers making
> >>> > the device available, and then call the drm load callback. Until this
> >>> > completes the device is really not ready and these early opens typically
> >>> > lead to oopses.
> >>> >
> >>> > We have been using the following patch to avoid this by marking the minors
> >>> > as in error until the load method has completed. This avoids the early
> >>> > open by simply erroring out the opens with EAGAIN. Obviously we should
> >>> > be delaying the open until the load method complete.
> >>> >
> >>> > I include the existing patch for completness (it is not really ready for
> >>> > merging) to illustrate the issue. I think it is logical that the wait
> >>> > should simply be delayed until the load has completed. I am proposing
> >>> > to include a wait queue associated with the idr cache for the drm minors
> >>> > which we can use to allow open callers to wait_event_interruptible() on.
> >>> > I'll be putting together a prototype shortly and will follow up with it.
> >>> >
> >>> > Thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Couldn't we just delay registering things until the driver is ready to
> >>> accept an open?
> >>>
> >>> Granted the midlayer of drm doesn't make that easy,
> >>
> >> It seems that we need the dri minor allocated before we hit the load
> >> function as things are done right now.
> >>
> >>> thanks for sending this out, it keeps falling off my radar, I don't
> >>> think I've ever seen this reported on RHEL/Fedora, which makes me
> >>> wonder what we are doing that makes us lucky.
> >>
> >> We never hit it until we started doing things earlier and quicker. I first
> >> found it in the prettification of boot so we were keen to get plymouth
> >> running as soon as possible. That lead to random panics and me finding
> >> this bug. The window is tiny as far as I know and it tends to be specific
> >> machines and specific package combinations which trigger it reliably.
> >>
> >> I suspect that a proper fix would allow delaying the registration as you
> >> suggest but in the interim a wait would at least avoid the issues we are
> >> seeing. I will see how awful it looks.
> >
> > Just to confirm its the drm_sysfs_device_add that causes the race we care about.
> >
> > it needs to happen after the driver is happy. Since it calls
> > device_register and that is what triggers udev magic to load the
> > userspace.
> >
> > If you have a userspace app banging on a static device node that might
> > need another set of fun fixes.
>
> Okay the sysfs add and the idr_replace are the things we need to delay.
Since you can still get at things with a static node, it seems like
locking is the real issue here? Is there no mutex we can take across
init to block any openers until we're done?
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-19 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-19 16:22 Andy Whitcroft
2012-04-19 16:22 ` [PATCH 1/1] drm -- stop early access to drm devices Andy Whitcroft
2012-04-19 16:30 ` [PATCH 0/1] [RFC] DRM locking issues during early open Dave Airlie
2012-04-19 16:41 ` Andy Whitcroft
2012-04-19 16:47 ` Dave Airlie
2012-04-19 16:52 ` Dave Airlie
2012-04-19 16:55 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2012-04-19 16:56 ` Dave Airlie
2012-04-19 17:00 ` Dave Airlie
2012-04-19 16:41 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-04-20 9:40 ` Dave Airlie
2012-04-20 10:31 ` Andy Whitcroft
2012-04-20 10:34 ` Dave Airlie
2012-04-20 17:25 ` Andy Whitcroft
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120419095516.595649b3@jbarnes-desktop \
--to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=bryce@canonical.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®