On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 3:44 AM Liang, Prike <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> AMD General
>
> Regards,
> Prike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Liang, Prike
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2026 10:49 AM
> > To: 'Alex Deucher' <[email protected]>;
> > [email protected]
> > Cc: Deucher, Alexander <[email protected]>; SHANMUGAM,
> > SRINIVASAN <[email protected]>; Khatri, Sunil
> > <[email protected]>
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/userq: properly account for resets
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Prike
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Alex Deucher <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2026 4:39 AM
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Cc: Deucher, Alexander <[email protected]>; SHANMUGAM,
> > > SRINIVASAN <[email protected]>; Liang, Prike
> > > <[email protected]>; Khatri, Sunil <[email protected]>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/userq: properly account for resets
> > >
> > > We need to increment the reset counter, force fence completion, and
> > > set the wedged event when a user queue is reset.
> > >
> > > mes_userq_reset_queue() handles this for collateral damage, but the
> > > caller needs to handle this directly for the original guilty queue.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Srinivasan Shanmugam <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Prike Liang <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Sunil Khatri <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c | 7 ++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
> > > index 6aa75da27f912..5e1262636e1e9 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c
> > > @@ -146,8 +146,13 @@ static void amdgpu_userq_hang_detect_work(struct
> > > work_struct *work)
> > > queue, NULL, NULL);
> > > else
> > > r = userq_funcs->reset(queue);
> > > - if (r)
> > > + if (r) {
> > > gpu_reset = true;
> > > + } else {
> > > + atomic_inc(&adev->gpu_reset_counter);
> > > + amdgpu_userq_fence_driver_force_completion(queue);
> > > + drm_dev_wedged_event(adev_to_drm(adev),
> > > DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_NONE, NULL);
> >
> > If we do the userq reset post similar process here just like as
> > mes_userq_reset_queue(), so do we need to clear the duplicate the code in
> > the
> > mes_userq_reset_queue()? Otherwise, the gpu reset counter should be
> > incorrect.
> > Except that, we might input the wedge task info to report the guilty
> > process info.
>
> As to the first question, I recheck the code and found out the guilty user
> queue in the amdgpu_gfx_reset_mes_compute() was reset separately before
> mes_userq_reset_queue(), with this current reset sequence then this change it
> make sense to update reset counter and force complete fence.
>
> But why need to reset the original guilty queue separately, should this
> guilty queue was found by the amdgpu_mes_detect_and_reset_hung_queues() in
> the MES firmware? If so, we may need to reset the guilty queue through
> mes_userq_reset_queue() rather than reset separately, then we don't need to
> add this change anymore.
We still need it for gfx and sdma queues. Those don't get reset via
amdgpu_gfx_reset_mes_compute(),
Alex
>
> >
> > > + }
> > > } else {
> > > gpu_reset = true;
> > > }
> > > --
> > > 2.55.0
>
