Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote: Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself in other ways on other systems. sorry, fingerfart. Anyway, I agree 100%. we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not working, even if we do revert.. Linus of complete b*llsh*t magic numbers in this ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 02:54:04PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Okay, I found the place in source that triggers this. It happens in the function r600_ib_test. The interesting thing is that not the ib-command itself is responsible but the fence that is emitted afterwards (proved by removing the fence command, where the problem went away). I don't know enough about the command semantics to make a guess what goes wrong there. But maybe you GPU folks have an idea? I can't think of anything off hand. It might be worth disabling the call to r600_ib_test() in r600_init() and then seeing if you get any errors when the fences are used later on when X starts or just at that point in the module load sequence. What's odd is that when you tested radeon.no_wb=1 you got the same behavior as that disables shadowing of fence writes to gpu gart mem, so it wouldn't be writing to memory in that case. Alex Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 02:54:04PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Okay, I found the place in source that triggers this. It happens in the function r600_ib_test. The interesting thing is that not the ib-command itself is responsible but the fence that is emitted afterwards (proved by removing the fence command, where the problem went away). I don't know enough about the command semantics to make a guess what goes wrong there. But maybe you GPU folks have an idea? I can't think of anything off hand. It might be worth disabling the call to r600_ib_test() in r600_init() and then seeing if you get any errors when the fences are used later on when X starts or just at that point in the module load sequence. What's odd is that when you tested radeon.no_wb=1 you got the same behavior as that disables shadowing of fence writes to gpu gart mem, so it wouldn't be writing to memory in that case. Alex It might be the irq ring write that is faulty. Cheers, Jerome ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 02:54:04PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Okay, I found the place in source that triggers this. It happens in the function r600_ib_test. The interesting thing is that not the ib-command itself is responsible but the fence that is emitted afterwards (proved by removing the fence command, where the problem went away). I don't know enough about the command semantics to make a guess what goes wrong there. But maybe you GPU folks have an idea? I can't think of anything off hand. It might be worth disabling the call to r600_ib_test() in r600_init() and then seeing if you get any errors when the fences are used later on when X starts or just at that point in the module load sequence. What's odd is that when you tested radeon.no_wb=1 you got the same behavior as that disables shadowing of fence writes to gpu gart mem, so it wouldn't be writing to memory in that case. Alex It might be the irq ring write that is faulty. That's disabled with no_wb=1 as well. Alex I mean the irq interrupt ring, i don't see this being disabled when no_wb=1 Cheers, Jerome ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 02:54:04PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Okay, I found the place in source that triggers this. It happens in the function r600_ib_test. The interesting thing is that not the ib-command itself is responsible but the fence that is emitted afterwards (proved by removing the fence command, where the problem went away). I don't know enough about the command semantics to make a guess what goes wrong there. But maybe you GPU folks have an idea? I can't think of anything off hand. It might be worth disabling the call to r600_ib_test() in r600_init() and then seeing if you get any errors when the fences are used later on when X starts or just at that point in the module load sequence. What's odd is that when you tested radeon.no_wb=1 you got the same behavior as that disables shadowing of fence writes to gpu gart mem, so it wouldn't be writing to memory in that case. Alex It might be the irq ring write that is faulty. That's disabled with no_wb=1 as well. Alex I mean the irq interrupt ring, i don't see this being disabled when no_wb=1 I meant the IH ring pointer writeback. The ih ring itself is still in gart memory. Alex Cheers, Jerome ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 02:54:04PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Okay, I found the place in source that triggers this. It happens in the function r600_ib_test. The interesting thing is that not the ib-command itself is responsible but the fence that is emitted afterwards (proved by removing the fence command, where the problem went away). I don't know enough about the command semantics to make a guess what goes wrong there. But maybe you GPU folks have an idea? Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 02:54:04PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Okay, I found the place in source that triggers this. It happens in the function r600_ib_test. The interesting thing is that not the ib-command itself is responsible but the fence that is emitted afterwards (proved by removing the fence command, where the problem went away). I don't know enough about the command semantics to make a guess what goes wrong there. But maybe you GPU folks have an idea? Joerg I can't think of any theory, at that point the wb, irq ring, cp buffer ib pool are all allocated and pinned into gtt so they all have valid entry backed by a real page. Maybe the GART flush update is seriously buggy but i expect we would have been hurt sooner by such things. Maybe there is a bug in the hw... wouldn't be surprised. Will try to think to crazy theory. Cheers, Jerome ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 09:06:41PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Alexandre Demers alexandre.f.dem...@gmail.com wrote: On 11-04-15 10:27 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:16:59AM -0400, Alexandre Demers wrote: Ok, I'll test it today. Should I apply it on a clean rc3 without any of the other patches? Yes, apply it just on -rc3 without any other patch. BTW, may I suggest adding the info under bug 33012 in kernel bugzilla? This could be useful in the future. Cool, thanks Joerg The patch was applied and tested. It looks fine, I'm able to boot without problem. Joerg, mind submitting it with a changelog that includes everything we learned about this bug and all the Tested-by's in place? Looks like I am too late, it is already applied. But the changelog contains a link to the korg-bugzilla which has all information too. So the information is not lost. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 12:18:02PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: On 04/15/2011 12:06 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: Joerg, mind submitting it with a changelog that includes everything we learned about this bug and all the Tested-by's in place? Is anyone of the opinion that we should try to revert the allocation order/alignment changes in addition to this fix? We should figure out what is written to 0xa0001000 (main memory) by GPU before internal GART is setup. Joerg, can you insert some dump code in the drm/radon code to find out which function cause the problem? I am not a GPU expert, but I will see what I can find out. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
* Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 09:06:41PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Alexandre Demers alexandre.f.dem...@gmail.com wrote: On 11-04-15 10:27 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:16:59AM -0400, Alexandre Demers wrote: Ok, I'll test it today. Should I apply it on a clean rc3 without any of the other patches? Yes, apply it just on -rc3 without any other patch. BTW, may I suggest adding the info under bug 33012 in kernel bugzilla? This could be useful in the future. Cool, thanks Joerg The patch was applied and tested. It looks fine, I'm able to boot without problem. Joerg, mind submitting it with a changelog that includes everything we learned about this bug and all the Tested-by's in place? Looks like I am too late, it is already applied. But the changelog contains a link to the korg-bugzilla which has all information too. So the information is not lost. Yeah. In this case getting the fix into -rc4 in a timely manner looked more important than waiting for an updated changelog :-) Thanks, Ingo ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 12:11:28PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: Do you also got the write if you load radeon with radeon.no_wb=1 ? I think at this address it's the wb page, or maybe the cp as wb likely take only one page radeon.no_wb=1 makes no difference. The box still reboots. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 12:11:28PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: Do you also got the write if you load radeon with radeon.no_wb=1 ? I think at this address it's the wb page, or maybe the cp as wb likely take only one page radeon.no_wb=1 makes no difference. The box still reboots. Joerg If you want to go the printk way you can add printk before each test ring_test, ib_test in r600.c this 2 functions are the own that might trigger the first GPU gart activities. Cheers, Jerome ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 05:34:46PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: Actually, the nb gart is part of the cpu. It is part of the cpu north bridge and can translate io and cpu accesses. In fact, it is a remapper of physical memory addresses. I know what it's for. In the IGP graphics chip is also part of the north bridge, but it may not be related at all. Okay, just wanted to make clear that it is part of the CPU and not of the chipset :) The problem seems to be related to specific gpu chips. On another notebook with an hd3000 card gtt and the nb gart aperture are both on 0xa000 too but the box works fine. I havn't tested with an hd5000 yet. The failing notebook has an hd4200 mobility. What exact model is the hd3000? Is it IGP GPU or a discrete GPU? It it's an IGP, it's identical to the hd4200 programming-wise. It is an IGP card, an ATI Technologies Inc RS780M/RS780MN [Radeon HD 3200 Graphics] according to lspci. Btw. what happens if the gpu accesses an unmapped address in the gtt range? It's redirected to a dummy page. So there should be no issue too, this is a very weird bug. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Don, 2011-04-14 at 23:09 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:28:43AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT base even when they are in different address spaces. Alex, can you comment on this? As Dave said, they are completely different addresses spaces. You could put the GPU aperture at 0 if you wanted (in fact we do on some chips). Perhaps there's some strange interaction with the nb gart since the nb gart on that chipset was designed to be used for graphics and the rs780/880 can be configured to use an agp aperture. Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the nb gart. Actually, the nb gart is part of the cpu. It is part of the cpu north bridge and can translate io and cpu accesses. In fact, it is a remapper of physical memory addresses. The problem seems to be related to specific gpu chips. On another notebook with an hd3000 card gtt and the nb gart aperture are both on 0xa000 too but the box works fine. Wasn't the working theory that the problem occurs if those two values aren't the same? -- Earthling Michel Dänzer |http://www.vmware.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:26:34AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: On Don, 2011-04-14 at 23:09 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:28:43AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT base even when they are in different address spaces. Alex, can you comment on this? As Dave said, they are completely different addresses spaces. You could put the GPU aperture at 0 if you wanted (in fact we do on some chips). Perhaps there's some strange interaction with the nb gart since the nb gart on that chipset was designed to be used for graphics and the rs780/880 can be configured to use an agp aperture. Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the nb gart. Actually, the nb gart is part of the cpu. It is part of the cpu north bridge and can translate io and cpu accesses. In fact, it is a remapper of physical memory addresses. The problem seems to be related to specific gpu chips. On another notebook with an hd3000 card gtt and the nb gart aperture are both on 0xa000 too but the box works fine. Wasn't the working theory that the problem occurs if those two values aren't the same? Yes it is, but this doesn't seem to be problematic on all readeon GPU chips. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:33:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not
working, even if we do revert..
Okay, here it is.
After experimenting with different configurations for the north-bridge
it turned out that a GART related MCE fires at the time the machine
reboots. BIOSes configure the machine to sync-flood in that case which
causes a reboot.
After decoding the MCE it turned out to be a GART TBL Wlk Error. Such
errors can happen if devices (speculativly) access GART ranges mapped
invalid. The AMD BKDG for Fam10h CPUs recommends to disable these errors
at all. But unfortunatly some BIOSes (including the one on my laptop)
forget to do this.
Below is a patch which disables these errors if the BIOS didn't do it.
It fixes the problem on my site.
Alexandre, can you try this patch on your machine too, please?
Regards,
Joerg
From aaacff8db50b6ed4345e337ecbe53e505699c7e5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Joerg Roedel joerg.roe...@amd.com
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:47:40 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] x86/amd: Disable GartTlbWlkErr when BIOS forgets it
This patch disables GartTlbWlk errors on AMD Fam10h CPUs if
the BIOS forgets to do is (or is just too old). Letting
these errors enabled can cause a sync-flood on the CPU
causing a reboot.
This patch is the fix for
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012
on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel joerg.roe...@amd.com
---
arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h |4
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c| 19 +++
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h
index fd5a1f3..3cce714 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h
@@ -96,11 +96,15 @@
#define MSR_IA32_MC0_ADDR 0x0402
#define MSR_IA32_MC0_MISC 0x0403
+#define MSR_AMD64_MC0_MASK 0xc0010044
+
#define MSR_IA32_MCx_CTL(x)(MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL + 4*(x))
#define MSR_IA32_MCx_STATUS(x) (MSR_IA32_MC0_STATUS + 4*(x))
#define MSR_IA32_MCx_ADDR(x) (MSR_IA32_MC0_ADDR + 4*(x))
#define MSR_IA32_MCx_MISC(x) (MSR_IA32_MC0_MISC + 4*(x))
+#define MSR_AMD64_MCx_MASK(x) (MSR_AMD64_MC0_MASK + (x))
+
/* These are consecutive and not in the normal 4er MCE bank block */
#define MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL2 0x0280
#define MSR_IA32_MCx_CTL2(x) (MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL2 + (x))
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
index 3ecece0..3532d3b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
@@ -615,6 +615,25 @@ static void __cpuinit init_amd(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
/* As a rule processors have APIC timer running in deep C states */
if (c-x86 = 0xf !cpu_has_amd_erratum(amd_erratum_400))
set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_ARAT);
+
+ /*
+* Disable GART TLB Walk Errors on Fam10h. We do this here
+* because this is always needed when GART is enabled, even in a
+* kernel which has no MCE support built in.
+*/
+ if (c-x86 == 0x10) {
+ /*
+* BIOS should disable GartTlbWlk Errors themself. If
+* it doesn't do it here as suggested by the BKDG.
+*
+* Fixes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012
+*/
+ u64 mask;
+
+ rdmsrl(MSR_AMD64_MCx_MASK(4), mask);
+ mask |= (1 10);
+ wrmsrl(MSR_AMD64_MCx_MASK(4), mask);
+ }
}
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
--
1.7.1
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
* Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:33:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not working, even if we do revert.. Okay, here it is. After experimenting with different configurations for the north-bridge it turned out that a GART related MCE fires at the time the machine reboots. BIOSes configure the machine to sync-flood in that case which causes a reboot. After decoding the MCE it turned out to be a GART TBL Wlk Error. Such errors can happen if devices (speculativly) access GART ranges mapped invalid. The AMD BKDG for Fam10h CPUs recommends to disable these errors at all. But unfortunatly some BIOSes (including the one on my laptop) forget to do this. Below is a patch which disables these errors if the BIOS didn't do it. It fixes the problem on my site. Ok, but how did the allocation changes start triggering this error in v2.6.39-rc1? There must still be some layout specific thing here, right? Do we understand the details of that as well? Thanks, Ingo ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 04:04:45PM +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote: What about tagging this patch for stable/longterm releases? Potentially there are other cases where certain combinations of hardware(GPUs)/drivers/whatsoever might trigger a GartTlbWlkErr. If the BIOS doesn't follow the BKDG recommendation to mask these errors, the system will hang/reboot. Thus I think having this quirk in .32 and .38 (at least) is useful. Right, thats certainly a good idea. The problem is not specific to GPUs, any other device can trigger this too. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:16:50PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: Ok, but how did the allocation changes start triggering this error in v2.6.39-rc1? There must still be some layout specific thing here, right? Do we understand the details of that as well? Well, thinking again about this, the GPU likely generated this DMA request before too (which has an address in the range configured for the GTT on the card), but nobody noticed because they just hit main memory. And with the allocation changes in 39-rc1 the GART aperture started to be on the same address as the GTT (in their respective address spaces) so that the DMA request hit the GART. This caused the MCE and the sync-flood. The open question is why the GPU generates a DMA request with an address that is configured as the GTT base (+1 page) on the card. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:16:50PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: Ok, but how did the allocation changes start triggering this error in v2.6.39-rc1? There must still be some layout specific thing here, right? Do we understand the details of that as well? No, I must admit that I lack enough knowledge about the GPU hardware to make an guess how this tanslation-request happened. All I can tell is the address that was reported in the MCE, it is 0xa0001000 (==the second page of the GART aperture). Maybe Alex can help here. Alex, may it be possible that the GPU generates DMA requests in the GTT area before the GTT is activated (or the activation is completed)? Or can you imagine any other reason? It shouldn't. The driver binds a dummy page to all entries in the table at init time and whenever the actual pages are unbound. Alex ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:16:50PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: Ok, but how did the allocation changes start triggering this error in v2.6.39-rc1? There must still be some layout specific thing here, right? Do we understand the details of that as well? Well, thinking again about this, the GPU likely generated this DMA request before too (which has an address in the range configured for the GTT on the card), but nobody noticed because they just hit main memory. And with the allocation changes in 39-rc1 the GART aperture started to be on the same address as the GTT (in their respective address spaces) so that the DMA request hit the GART. This caused the MCE and the sync-flood. The open question is why the GPU generates a DMA request with an address that is configured as the GTT base (+1 page) on the card. Joerg Do you also got the write if you load radeon with radeon.no_wb=1 ? I think at this address it's the wb page, or maybe the cp as wb likely take only one page Cheers, Jerome ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:11:52PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:33:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not working, even if we do revert.. Okay, here it is. After experimenting with different configurations for the north-bridge it turned out that a GART related MCE fires at the time the machine reboots. BIOSes configure the machine to sync-flood in that case which causes a reboot. After decoding the MCE it turned out to be a GART TBL Wlk Error. Such errors can happen if devices (speculativly) access GART ranges mapped invalid. The AMD BKDG for Fam10h CPUs recommends to disable these errors at all. But unfortunatly some BIOSes (including the one on my laptop) forget to do this. Below is a patch which disables these errors if the BIOS didn't do it. It fixes the problem on my site. Alexandre, can you try this patch on your machine too, please? Regards, Joerg From aaacff8db50b6ed4345e337ecbe53e505699c7e5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joerg Roedel joerg.roe...@amd.com Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:47:40 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] x86/amd: Disable GartTlbWlkErr when BIOS forgets it This patch disables GartTlbWlk errors on AMD Fam10h CPUs if the BIOS forgets to do is (or is just too old). Letting these errors enabled can cause a sync-flood on the CPU causing a reboot. This patch is the fix for https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012 on my machine. Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel joerg.roe...@amd.com Joerg, What about tagging this patch for stable/longterm releases? Potentially there are other cases where certain combinations of hardware(GPUs)/drivers/whatsoever might trigger a GartTlbWlkErr. If the BIOS doesn't follow the BKDG recommendation to mask these errors, the system will hang/reboot. Thus I think having this quirk in .32 and .38 (at least) is useful. Andreas ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 05:34:46PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:28:43AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT base even when they are in different address spaces. Alex, can you comment on this? As Dave said, they are completely different addresses spaces. You could put the GPU aperture at 0 if you wanted (in fact we do on some chips). Perhaps there's some strange interaction with the nb gart since the nb gart on that chipset was designed to be used for graphics and the rs780/880 can be configured to use an agp aperture. Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the nb gart. Actually, the nb gart is part of the cpu. It is part of the cpu north bridge and can translate io and cpu accesses. In fact, it is a remapper of physical memory addresses. I know what it's for. In the IGP graphics chip is also part of the north bridge, but it may not be related at all. The problem seems to be related to specific gpu chips. On another notebook with an hd3000 card gtt and the nb gart aperture are both on 0xa000 too but the box works fine. I havn't tested with an hd5000 yet. The failing notebook has an hd4200 mobility. What exact model is the hd3000? Is it IGP GPU or a discrete GPU? It it's an IGP, it's identical to the hd4200 programming-wise. BTW, first of all the other notebook had a different CPU (it's family 0fh and Joerg's is family 10h). So different CPUs different GARTs different issues ;-) (Furthermore for CPU family 0fh reporting of GartTblWalk errors is already switched off in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c.) Andreas ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 11-04-15 10:27 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:16:59AM -0400, Alexandre Demers wrote: Ok, I'll test it today. Should I apply it on a clean rc3 without any of the other patches? Yes, apply it just on -rc3 without any other patch. BTW, may I suggest adding the info under bug 33012 in kernel bugzilla? This could be useful in the future. Cool, thanks Joerg The patch was applied and tested. It looks fine, I'm able to boot without problem. -- Alexandre Demers ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
* Alexandre Demers alexandre.f.dem...@gmail.com wrote: On 11-04-15 10:27 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:16:59AM -0400, Alexandre Demers wrote: Ok, I'll test it today. Should I apply it on a clean rc3 without any of the other patches? Yes, apply it just on -rc3 without any other patch. BTW, may I suggest adding the info under bug 33012 in kernel bugzilla? This could be useful in the future. Cool, thanks Joerg The patch was applied and tested. It looks fine, I'm able to boot without problem. Joerg, mind submitting it with a changelog that includes everything we learned about this bug and all the Tested-by's in place? Is anyone of the opinion that we should try to revert the allocation order/alignment changes in addition to this fix? Thanks, Ingo ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/15/2011 12:06 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: Joerg, mind submitting it with a changelog that includes everything we learned about this bug and all the Tested-by's in place? Is anyone of the opinion that we should try to revert the allocation order/alignment changes in addition to this fix? We should figure out what is written to 0xa0001000 (main memory) by GPU before internal GART is setup. Joerg, can you insert some dump code in the drm/radon code to find out which function cause the problem? Thanks Yinghai ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 07:07 PM, Dave Airlie wrote: Okay, staring at this, it definitely seems toxic to overlay the GART over memory areas reserved by the BIOS. If I were to guess, I would say that the problem here seems to be that the kernel thinks it is overlaying 64 MiB of memory, but the actual GART is in fact 512 MiB in size -- 131072 CPU pages -- which now overlaps the BIOS reserved areas. Alex D., could you comment on the num cpu pages bit? These are not CPU addresses. I think we've stated that already. Not the droids. the num cpu pages is how many CPU pages would be needed to fill the GPU GTT, for those crazy cases where CPU pagesize != GPU pagesize. OK, well, something is still weird. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:33:40 -0700 Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote: Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself in other ways on other systems. sorry, fingerfart. Anyway, I agree 100%. we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not working, even if we do revert.. Definitely because if it fails when the magic involves the GART base it starts to sound like something may be hitting the wrong address space or not flushing properly. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 06:58:46PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 04/13/2011 12:14 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
so looks bios program wrong address to the radon card?
Okay, staring at this, it definitely seems toxic to overlay the GART
over memory areas reserved by the BIOS. If I were to guess, I would say
that the problem here seems to be that the kernel thinks it is
overlaying 64 MiB of memory, but the actual GART is in fact 512 MiB in
size -- 131072 CPU pages -- which now overlaps the BIOS reserved areas.
Alex D., could you comment on the num cpu pages bit?
Okay, I tried the debug-patch from Yinghai (posted to the bugzilla):
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c
@@ -325,6 +325,8 @@ void radeon_gtt_location(struct radeon_device *rdev, struct
radeon_mc *mc)
mc-gtt_size = size_bf;
}
mc-gtt_start = (mc-vram_start ~mc-gtt_base_align) -
mc-gtt_size;
+ if (mc-gtt_start == 0xa000)
+ mc-gtt_start = 0x8000;
} else {
if (mc-gtt_size size_af) {
dev_warn(rdev-dev, limiting GTT\n);
And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots
fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT
base even when they are in different address spaces.
Alex, can you comment on this?
Regards,
Joerg
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 06:58:46PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 04/13/2011 12:14 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
so looks bios program wrong address to the radon card?
Okay, staring at this, it definitely seems toxic to overlay the GART
over memory areas reserved by the BIOS. If I were to guess, I would say
that the problem here seems to be that the kernel thinks it is
overlaying 64 MiB of memory, but the actual GART is in fact 512 MiB in
size -- 131072 CPU pages -- which now overlaps the BIOS reserved areas.
Alex D., could you comment on the num cpu pages bit?
Okay, I tried the debug-patch from Yinghai (posted to the bugzilla):
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c
@@ -325,6 +325,8 @@ void radeon_gtt_location(struct radeon_device *rdev,
struct radeon_mc *mc)
mc-gtt_size = size_bf;
}
mc-gtt_start = (mc-vram_start ~mc-gtt_base_align) -
mc-gtt_size;
+ if (mc-gtt_start == 0xa000)
+ mc-gtt_start = 0x8000;
} else {
if (mc-gtt_size size_af) {
dev_warn(rdev-dev, limiting GTT\n);
And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots
fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT
base even when they are in different address spaces.
Alex, can you comment on this?
Wierd either a hw bug or some access to the GTT is leaking out before,
things are setup properly,
I think the RS780/880 docs are on the website, but generally the
address spaces are completely separate so anything getting through is
very unusual.
Dave.
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 01:03:37PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: Hello, On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:33:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote: Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself in other ways on other systems. sorry, fingerfart. Anyway, I agree 100%. we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not working, even if we do revert.. There were (and still are) places where memblock callers implemented ad-hoc top-down allocation by stepping down start limit until allocation succeeds. Several of them have been removed since top-down became the default behavior, so simply reverting the commit is likely to cause subtle issues. Maybe the best approach is introducing @topdown parameter and use it selectively for pure memory allocations. Wouldn't it be better to provide a seperate memblock allocation function which operates top-down and use this one in the places that need it? This way it wouldn't break code that relies on bottom-up. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 06:58:46PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 04/13/2011 12:14 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
so looks bios program wrong address to the radon card?
Okay, staring at this, it definitely seems toxic to overlay the GART
over memory areas reserved by the BIOS. If I were to guess, I would say
that the problem here seems to be that the kernel thinks it is
overlaying 64 MiB of memory, but the actual GART is in fact 512 MiB in
size -- 131072 CPU pages -- which now overlaps the BIOS reserved areas.
Alex D., could you comment on the num cpu pages bit?
Okay, I tried the debug-patch from Yinghai (posted to the bugzilla):
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c
@@ -325,6 +325,8 @@ void radeon_gtt_location(struct radeon_device *rdev,
struct radeon_mc *mc)
mc-gtt_size = size_bf;
}
mc-gtt_start = (mc-vram_start ~mc-gtt_base_align) -
mc-gtt_size;
+ if (mc-gtt_start == 0xa000)
+ mc-gtt_start = 0x8000;
} else {
if (mc-gtt_size size_af) {
dev_warn(rdev-dev, limiting GTT\n);
And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots
fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT
base even when they are in different address spaces.
Alex, can you comment on this?
As Dave said, they are completely different addresses spaces. You
could put the GPU aperture at 0 if you wanted (in fact we do on some
chips). Perhaps there's some strange interaction with the nb gart
since the nb gart on that chipset was designed to be used for graphics
and the rs780/880 can be configured to use an agp aperture.
Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the nb gart.
Alex
Regards,
Joerg
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/14/2011 02:11 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: I'd strongly suggest we revert back to the old and proven allocation order, as long as it results in valid layouts. Even if we figure out this particular GART/GTT assumption there might be a dozen others in other types of hardware. Yes, but we might also be hiding a real bug which bites other hardware. We have found real and very serious bugs in the kernel this way before -- things where drivers scribble over random memory and allocation order exposed the failure in a predictable way, as opposed to random crashes. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:28:43AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT base even when they are in different address spaces. Alex, can you comment on this? As Dave said, they are completely different addresses spaces. You could put the GPU aperture at 0 if you wanted (in fact we do on some chips). Perhaps there's some strange interaction with the nb gart since the nb gart on that chipset was designed to be used for graphics and the rs780/880 can be configured to use an agp aperture. Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the nb gart. Actually, the nb gart is part of the cpu. It is part of the cpu north bridge and can translate io and cpu accesses. In fact, it is a remapper of physical memory addresses. The problem seems to be related to specific gpu chips. On another notebook with an hd3000 card gtt and the nb gart aperture are both on 0xa000 too but the box works fine. I havn't tested with an hd5000 yet. The failing notebook has an hd4200 mobility. Btw. what happens if the gpu accesses an unmapped address in the gtt range? Regards, Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:28:43AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: And this makes a difference, with this change on-top of -rc3 the box boots fine. So there seems to be some dependency between the GART base and the GTT base even when they are in different address spaces. Alex, can you comment on this? As Dave said, they are completely different addresses spaces. You could put the GPU aperture at 0 if you wanted (in fact we do on some chips). Perhaps there's some strange interaction with the nb gart since the nb gart on that chipset was designed to be used for graphics and the rs780/880 can be configured to use an agp aperture. Unfortunately, I'm not that familiar with the nb gart. Actually, the nb gart is part of the cpu. It is part of the cpu north bridge and can translate io and cpu accesses. In fact, it is a remapper of physical memory addresses. I know what it's for. In the IGP graphics chip is also part of the north bridge, but it may not be related at all. The problem seems to be related to specific gpu chips. On another notebook with an hd3000 card gtt and the nb gart aperture are both on 0xa000 too but the box works fine. I havn't tested with an hd5000 yet. The failing notebook has an hd4200 mobility. What exact model is the hd3000? Is it IGP GPU or a discrete GPU? It it's an IGP, it's identical to the hd4200 programming-wise. Btw. what happens if the gpu accesses an unmapped address in the gtt range? It's redirected to a dummy page. Alex ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
* Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: The problem does not happen with 2.6.38. I try to bisect this further down to a commit. Alex, please let me know if you need any further information. If you can bisect it, that would be great. Thanks, Bisecting actually gave a very weird result. It points to d2137d5af4259f50c19addb8246a186c9ffac325 which is a merge-commit in the x86 tree. Even more weird is that this notebook is the only machine with these symptoms, all my other boxes are fine. During the bisect I tested commits from Yinghai which were good. It seems like the problem appeared with the merge. There's a similar looking bug being debugged here: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012 Could you please send the before/after bootlog (in particular all memory init messages included) and your .config? before: f005fe12b90c: x86-64: Move out cleanup higmap [_brk_end, _end) out of init_memory_mapping() after: d2137d5af425: Merge branch 'linus' into x86/bootmem I've Cc:-ed more people who might have an idea about it. Thanks, Ingo ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:46:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: Could you please send the before/after bootlog (in particular all memory init messages included) and your .config? before: f005fe12b90c: x86-64: Move out cleanup higmap [_brk_end, _end) out of init_memory_mapping() after: d2137d5af425: Merge branch 'linus' into x86/bootmem I've Cc:-ed more people who might have an idea about it. Okay, I have done some more bisecting and debugging today. First of all, I bisected between v2.6.37-rc2..f005fe12b90c which where only a couple of patches and merged v2.6.38-rc4 in at every step. There was no failure found. Then I tried this again, but this time I merged v2.6.38-rc5 at every step and was successful. The bad commit in this branch turned out to be 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c which is related to memblock. Then I tried to find out which change between 2.6.38-rc4 and 2.6.38-rc5 is needed to trigger the failure, so I used f005fe12b90c as a base, bisected between v2.6.38-rc4..v2.6.38-rc5 and merged every bisect step into the base and tested. Here the bad commit turned out to be e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 which is related to gart. It turned out that the gart aperture on that box is on another position with these patches. Before it was as 0xa400 and now it is at 0xa000. It seems like this has something to do with the root-cause. Reverting commit 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c fixes the problem btw. and booting with iommu=soft also works, but I have no idea yet why the aperture at that address is a problem (with the patch reverted the aperture lands at 0x8000). I have put some debug-data online. There is my .config and two dmesg-files for good (==2.6.39-rc3 + revert) and bad (==2.6.39-rc3) I also created these dmesg-files again with memblock=debug, maybe that helps to find the problem. The files are at http://www.8bytes.org/~joro/debug/ Or someone else has an idea about the issue... Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 10:21 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: First of all, I bisected between v2.6.37-rc2..f005fe12b90c which where only a couple of patches and merged v2.6.38-rc4 in at every step. There was no failure found. Then I tried this again, but this time I merged v2.6.38-rc5 at every step and was successful. The bad commit in this branch turned out to be 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c which is related to memblock. Then I tried to find out which change between 2.6.38-rc4 and 2.6.38-rc5 is needed to trigger the failure, so I used f005fe12b90c as a base, bisected between v2.6.38-rc4..v2.6.38-rc5 and merged every bisect step into the base and tested. Here the bad commit turned out to be e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 which is related to gart. It turned out that the gart aperture on that box is on another position with these patches. Before it was as 0xa400 and now it is at 0xa000. It seems like this has something to do with the root-cause. Reverting commit 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c fixes the problem btw. and booting with iommu=soft also works, but I have no idea yet why the aperture at that address is a problem (with the patch reverted the aperture lands at 0x8000). Does reverting e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 solve the problem for you? 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c is a memory-allocation-order patch, which have a nasty tendency to unmask bugs elsewhere in the kernel. However, e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 looks positively strange (and it doesn't exactly help that the description is written in Yinghai-ese and is therefore nearly impossible to decode, never mind tell if it is remotely correct.) -hpa ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 10:21 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:46:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: First of all, I bisected between v2.6.37-rc2..f005fe12b90c which where only a couple of patches and merged v2.6.38-rc4 in at every step. There was no failure found. Then I tried this again, but this time I merged v2.6.38-rc5 at every step and was successful. The bad commit in this branch turned out to be 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c which is related to memblock. Then I tried to find out which change between 2.6.38-rc4 and 2.6.38-rc5 is needed to trigger the failure, so I used f005fe12b90c as a base, bisected between v2.6.38-rc4..v2.6.38-rc5 and merged every bisect step into the base and tested. Here the bad commit turned out to be e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 which is related to gart. It turned out that the gart aperture on that box is on another position with these patches. Before it was as 0xa400 and now it is at 0xa000. It seems like this has something to do with the root-cause. Reverting commit 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c fixes the problem btw. and booting with iommu=soft also works, but I have no idea yet why the aperture at that address is a problem (with the patch reverted the aperture lands at 0x8000). I have put some debug-data online. There is my .config and two dmesg-files for good (==2.6.39-rc3 + revert) and bad (==2.6.39-rc3) I also created these dmesg-files again with memblock=debug, maybe that helps to find the problem. The files are at http://www.8bytes.org/~joro/debug/ thanks for the bisecting... so those two patches uncover some problems. [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xa000-0xa3ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ a000 so kernel try to reallocate apperture. because BIOS allocated is pointed to RAM or size is too small. but your radeon does use [0xa000, 0xbfff) [4.281993] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.290672] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.298550] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.309857] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.313748] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896524 kiB. [4.320379] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.324948] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.329832] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. and the one seems working: [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0x8000-0x83ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ 8000 [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xacb6bdc0-0xacb6bddf] BOOTMEM will use different position... [4.250159] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.258830] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.266742] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.271549] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.275435] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896526 kiB. [4.282066] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.282085] usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [4.293076] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.298277] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [4.303218] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [4.309854] [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [4.315970] [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [4.320094] [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 So question is why radeon is using the address [0xa000 - 0xc00], and in E820 it is RAM [0.00] BIOS-e820: 0010 - acb8d000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: acb8d000 - acb8f000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: acb8f000 - afce9000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afce9000 - afd21000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afd21000 - afd4f000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afd4f000 - afdcf000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afdcf000 - afecf000 (ACPI NVS) [
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 10:21 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:46:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: Could you please send the before/after bootlog (in particular all memory init messages included) and your .config? before: f005fe12b90c: x86-64: Move out cleanup higmap [_brk_end, _end) out of init_memory_mapping() after: d2137d5af425: Merge branch 'linus' into x86/bootmem I've Cc:-ed more people who might have an idea about it. Okay, I have done some more bisecting and debugging today. First of all, *huge* thanks for this effort. At least we need to track down the bits that need to be reverted -- it is past rc3, and it's time to see what we should revert and tell the submitter to try again next cycle. This looks to be the same issue as in bugzilla 33012: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012 ... so it would be good if we could keep the information in there. -hpa ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:51:39AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 04/13/2011 10:21 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: First of all, I bisected between v2.6.37-rc2..f005fe12b90c which where only a couple of patches and merged v2.6.38-rc4 in at every step. There was no failure found. Then I tried this again, but this time I merged v2.6.38-rc5 at every step and was successful. The bad commit in this branch turned out to be 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c which is related to memblock. Then I tried to find out which change between 2.6.38-rc4 and 2.6.38-rc5 is needed to trigger the failure, so I used f005fe12b90c as a base, bisected between v2.6.38-rc4..v2.6.38-rc5 and merged every bisect step into the base and tested. Here the bad commit turned out to be e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 which is related to gart. It turned out that the gart aperture on that box is on another position with these patches. Before it was as 0xa400 and now it is at 0xa000. It seems like this has something to do with the root-cause. Reverting commit 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c fixes the problem btw. and booting with iommu=soft also works, but I have no idea yet why the aperture at that address is a problem (with the patch reverted the aperture lands at 0x8000). Does reverting e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 solve the problem for you? No, reverting that patch doesn't make the problem go away (and the gart aperture is still on 0xa000). I tested this in 39-rc3, I havn't tested if it makes a difference on the original bisect-commit from Ingo, probably it does (don't know if that matters). Strange about this commit is that it fixes an x86 gart aperture allocation bug in generic memblock code. 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c is a memory-allocation-order patch, which have a nasty tendency to unmask bugs elsewhere in the kernel. However, e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 looks positively strange (and it doesn't exactly help that the description is written in Yinghai-ese and is therefore nearly impossible to decode, never mind tell if it is remotely correct.) I think that the two commits are okay and the bug is somewhere else, but I have no idea yet were to look next. I spent some time looking at radeon code and talking to Alex about it (because it seemed suspicous that the GTT is on 0xa000 too, but as Alex explained me this is an address in the GPU address space and shouldn't matter). Regards, Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:39:29AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 04/13/2011 10:21 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:46:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: Could you please send the before/after bootlog (in particular all memory init messages included) and your .config? before: f005fe12b90c: x86-64: Move out cleanup higmap [_brk_end, _end) out of init_memory_mapping() after: d2137d5af425: Merge branch 'linus' into x86/bootmem I've Cc:-ed more people who might have an idea about it. Okay, I have done some more bisecting and debugging today. First of all, *huge* thanks for this effort. At least we need to track down the bits that need to be reverted -- it is past rc3, and it's time to see what we should revert and tell the submitter to try again next cycle. This looks to be the same issue as in bugzilla 33012: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012 ... so it would be good if we could keep the information in there. Yes, I try to find my korg bugzilla account again and drop the information from this email there. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:14:55PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: thanks for the bisecting... so those two patches uncover some problems. [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xa000-0xa3ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ a000 so kernel try to reallocate apperture. because BIOS allocated is pointed to RAM or size is too small. It is actually beyond 4GB on that machine, this value read here is from the previous kernel-boot. The BIOS does not reset these values on a reboot. but your radeon does use [0xa000, 0xbfff) Yes, I suspected that too (and spent a few hours reading radeon code), but then I talked the Alex Deucher and he explained that these addresses which the driver prints for GTT and VRAM are in the GPU address space and do not refer to system ram. So this shouldn't be the problem. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote: On 04/13/2011 10:21 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:46:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: First of all, I bisected between v2.6.37-rc2..f005fe12b90c which where only a couple of patches and merged v2.6.38-rc4 in at every step. There was no failure found. Then I tried this again, but this time I merged v2.6.38-rc5 at every step and was successful. The bad commit in this branch turned out to be 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c which is related to memblock. Then I tried to find out which change between 2.6.38-rc4 and 2.6.38-rc5 is needed to trigger the failure, so I used f005fe12b90c as a base, bisected between v2.6.38-rc4..v2.6.38-rc5 and merged every bisect step into the base and tested. Here the bad commit turned out to be e6d2e2b2b1e1455df16d68a78f4a3874c7b3ad20 which is related to gart. It turned out that the gart aperture on that box is on another position with these patches. Before it was as 0xa400 and now it is at 0xa000. It seems like this has something to do with the root-cause. Reverting commit 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c fixes the problem btw. and booting with iommu=soft also works, but I have no idea yet why the aperture at that address is a problem (with the patch reverted the aperture lands at 0x8000). I have put some debug-data online. There is my .config and two dmesg-files for good (==2.6.39-rc3 + revert) and bad (==2.6.39-rc3) I also created these dmesg-files again with memblock=debug, maybe that helps to find the problem. The files are at http://www.8bytes.org/~joro/debug/ thanks for the bisecting... so those two patches uncover some problems. [ 0.00] Checking aperture... [ 0.00] No AGP bridge found [ 0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [ 0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [ 0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [ 0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [ 0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [ 0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xa000-0xa3ff] aperture64 [ 0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ a000 so kernel try to reallocate apperture. because BIOS allocated is pointed to RAM or size is too small. but your radeon does use [0xa000, 0xbfff) [ 4.281993] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [ 4.290672] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [ 4.298550] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [ 4.309857] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [ 4.313748] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896524 kiB. [ 4.320379] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [ 4.324948] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [ 4.329832] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. and the one seems working: [ 0.00] Checking aperture... [ 0.00] No AGP bridge found [ 0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [ 0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [ 0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [ 0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [ 0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [ 0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0x8000-0x83ff] aperture64 [ 0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ 8000 [ 0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xacb6bdc0-0xacb6bddf] BOOTMEM will use different position... [ 4.250159] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [ 4.258830] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [ 4.266742] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [ 4.271549] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [ 4.275435] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896526 kiB. [ 4.282066] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [ 4.282085] usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [ 4.293076] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [ 4.298277] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [ 4.303218] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [ 4.309854] [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [ 4.315970] [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [ 4.320094] [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 So question is why radeon is using the address [0xa000 - 0xc00], and in E820 it is RAM The VRAM and GTT addresses in the dmesg are internal GPU addresses not system addresses. The GPU has it's own internal address space for on-chip memory clients (texture samplers, render buffers, display controllers, etc.). The GPU sets up two apertures in it's internal address space and on-chip client requests are forwarded to the appropriate place by the GPU's memory controller. Addresses
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 12:34 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:14:55PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
thanks for the bisecting...
so those two patches uncover some problems.
[0.00] Checking aperture...
[0.00] No AGP bridge found
[0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB
[0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring.
[0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole
[0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup
[0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM
[0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xa000-0xa3ff]
aperture64
[0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ a000
so kernel try to reallocate apperture. because BIOS allocated is pointed to
RAM or size is too small.
It is actually beyond 4GB on that machine, this value read here is from
the previous kernel-boot. The BIOS does not reset these values on a
reboot.
but your radeon does use [0xa000, 0xbfff)
Yes, I suspected that too (and spent a few hours reading radeon code),
but then I talked the Alex Deucher and he explained that these addresses
which the driver prints for GTT and VRAM are in the GPU address space
and do not refer to system ram. So this shouldn't be the problem.
can you try following change ? it will push gart to 0x8000
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
index 86d1ad4..3b6a9d5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static u32 __init allocate_aperture(void)
* so don't use 512M below as gart iommu, leave the space for kernel
* code for safe
*/
- addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20);
+ addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21);
if (addr == MEMBLOCK_ERROR || addr + aper_size 0x) {
printk(KERN_ERR
Cannot allocate aperture memory hole (%lx,%uK)\n,
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote: can you try following change ? it will push gart to 0x8000 diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c index 86d1ad4..3b6a9d5 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static u32 __init allocate_aperture(void) * so don't use 512M below as gart iommu, leave the space for kernel * code for safe */ - addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); + addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); What are all the magic numbers, and why would 0x8000 be special? Why don't we write code that just works? Or absent a just works set of patches, why don't we revert to code that has years of testing? This kind of I broke things, so now I will jiggle things randomly until they unbreak is not acceptable. Either explain why that fixes a real BUG (and why the magic constants need to be what they are), or just revert the patch that caused the problem, and go back to the allocation patters that have years of experience. Guys, we've had this discussion before, in PCI allocation. We don't do this. We tried switching the PCI region allocations to top-down, and IT WAS A FAILURE. We reverted it to what we had years of testing with. Don't just make random changes. There really are only two acceptable models of development: think and analyze or years and years of testing on thousands of machines. Those two really do work. Linus ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 01:54 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote: can you try following change ? it will push gart to 0x8000 diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c index 86d1ad4..3b6a9d5 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static u32 __init allocate_aperture(void) * so don't use 512M below as gart iommu, leave the space for kernel * code for safe */ - addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); + addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); What are all the magic numbers, and why would 0x8000 be special? that is the old value when kernel was doing bottom-up bootmem allocation. Why don't we write code that just works? Or absent a just works set of patches, why don't we revert to code that has years of testing? This kind of I broke things, so now I will jiggle things randomly until they unbreak is not acceptable. Either explain why that fixes a real BUG (and why the magic constants need to be what they are), or just revert the patch that caused the problem, and go back to the allocation patters that have years of experience. Guys, we've had this discussion before, in PCI allocation. We don't do this. We tried switching the PCI region allocations to top-down, and IT WAS A FAILURE. We reverted it to what we had years of testing with. Don't just make random changes. There really are only two acceptable models of development: think and analyze or years and years of testing on thousands of machines. Those two really do work. We did do the analyzing, and only difference seems to be: good one is using 0x8000 and bad one is using 0xa000. We try to figure out if it needs low address and it happen to work because kernel was doing bottom up allocation. Thanks Yinghai ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:48:48PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: - addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); + addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); Btw, while looking at this code I wondered why the 512M goal is enforced by the alignment. Start could be set to 512M instead and the alignment can be aper_size as it should. Any reason for such a big alignment? Joerg P.S.: The box is still in the office, I will try this debug-patch tomorrow. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 02:50 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:48:48PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: -addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); +addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); Btw, while looking at this code I wondered why the 512M goal is enforced by the alignment. Start could be set to 512M instead and the alignment can be aper_size as it should. Any reason for such a big alignment? when using bootmem, try to use big alignment (512M ), so we could avoid take ram range below 512M. commit 7677b2ef6c0c4fddc84f6473f3863f40eb71821b Author: Yinghai Lu yhlu.kernel.s...@gmail.com Date: Mon Apr 14 20:40:37 2008 -0700 x86_64: allocate gart aperture from 512M because we try to reserve dma32 early, so we have chance to get aperture from 64M. with some sequence aperture allocated from RAM, could become E820_RESERVED. and then if doing a kexec with a big kernel that uncompressed size is above 64M we could have a range conflict with still using gart. So allocate gart aperture from 512M instead. Also change the fallback_aper_order to 5, because we don't have chance to get 2G or 4G aperture. We can change it back to 32M or make it equal to size. P.S.: The box is still in the office, I will try this debug-patch tomorrow. Alexandre's system is working at 0xa400 with 2.6.38.2 So it is not low address problem. could be other reason like some other code could need lower address. Thanks Yinghai ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 02:50 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:48:48PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: -addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); +addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); Btw, while looking at this code I wondered why the 512M goal is enforced by the alignment. Start could be set to 512M instead and the alignment can be aper_size as it should. Any reason for such a big alignment? Joerg P.S.: The box is still in the office, I will try this debug-patch tomorrow. The only reason that I can think of is that the aperture itself can be huge, and perhaps 512 MiB is the biggest such known. 512ULL21 is of course a particularly moronic way to write 1 GiB, but it was a debug patch. The value 512 MiB apparently comes from 7677b2ef6c0c4fddc84f6473f3863f40eb71821b, which is apparently totally ad hoc; effectively it tries to prevent a collision with kexec by hardcoding the kdump allocation as it sat at that point in time in the GART assignment rules. Yeah. Brilliant. -hpa ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 02:59 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: On 04/13/2011 02:50 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:48:48PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: - addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); + addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); Btw, while looking at this code I wondered why the 512M goal is enforced by the alignment. Start could be set to 512M instead and the alignment can be aper_size as it should. Any reason for such a big alignment? when using bootmem, try to use big alignment (512M ), so we could avoid take ram range below 512M. Yes, his question was why on Earth are you using 0 as start if that is the purpose. On top of that, where the hell does the magic 512 MiB come from? It looks like it is either completly ad hoc, or it has something to do with where the kexec kernel was allocated once upon a time. -hpa ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 03:01:10PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 04/13/2011 02:50 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:48:48PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: - addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); + addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); Btw, while looking at this code I wondered why the 512M goal is enforced by the alignment. Start could be set to 512M instead and the alignment can be aper_size as it should. Any reason for such a big alignment? Joerg P.S.: The box is still in the office, I will try this debug-patch tomorrow. The only reason that I can think of is that the aperture itself can be huge, and perhaps 512 MiB is the biggest such known. Well, that would work as well by just using aper_size as alignment, the aperture needs to be aligned on its size anyway. This code only runs when Linux allocates the aperture itself and if I am mistaken is uses always 64MB when doing this. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 03:22 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 03:01:10PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 04/13/2011 02:50 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:48:48PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: - addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL20); + addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, 1ULL32, aper_size, 512ULL21); Btw, while looking at this code I wondered why the 512M goal is enforced by the alignment. Start could be set to 512M instead and the alignment can be aper_size as it should. Any reason for such a big alignment? Joerg P.S.: The box is still in the office, I will try this debug-patch tomorrow. The only reason that I can think of is that the aperture itself can be huge, and perhaps 512 MiB is the biggest such known. Well, that would work as well by just using aper_size as alignment, the aperture needs to be aligned on its size anyway. This code only runs when Linux allocates the aperture itself and if I am mistaken is uses always 64MB when doing this. Yes, I would agree with that. The sane thing would be to set the base to whatever address needs to be guarded against (WHICH SHOULD BE MOTIVATED), and use aper_size as alignment, *unless* we are only using the initial portion of a much larger hardware structure that needs natural alignment (which isn't clear to me, I do know we sometimes use only a fraction of the GART, but that doesn't mean we need to naturally-align the entire thing, nor that 512 MiB is sufficient to do so.) -hpa ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote: What are all the magic numbers, and why would 0x8000 be special? that is the old value when kernel was doing bottom-up bootmem allocation. I understand, BUT THAT IS STILL A TOTALLY MAGIC NUMBER! It makes it come out the same ON THAT ONE MACHINE. So no, it's not the old value. It's a random value that gets the old value in one specific case. Why don't we write code that just works? Or absent a just works set of patches, why don't we revert to code that has years of testing? This kind of I broke things, so now I will jiggle things randomly until they unbreak is not acceptable. Either explain why that fixes a real BUG (and why the magic constants need to be what they are), or just revert the patch that caused the problem, and go back to the allocation patters that have years of experience. Guys, we've had this discussion before, in PCI allocation. We don't do this. We tried switching the PCI region allocations to top-down, and IT WAS A FAILURE. We reverted it to what we had years of testing with. Don't just make random changes. There really are only two acceptable models of development: think and analyze or years and years of testing on thousands of machines. Those two really do work. We did do the analyzing, and only difference seems to be: No. Yinghai, we have had this discussion before, and dammit, you need to understand the difference between understanding the problem and put in random values until it works on one machine. There was absolutely _zero_ analysis done. You do not actually understand WHY the numbers matter. You just look at two random numbers, and one works, the other does not. That's not analyzing. That's just random number games. If you cannot see and understand the difference between an actual analytical solution where you _understand_ what the code is doing and why, and random numbers that happen to work on one machine, I don't know what to tell you. good one is using 0x8000 and bad one is using 0xa000. We try to figure out if it needs low address and it happen to work because kernel was doing bottom up allocation. No. Let me repeat my point one more time. You have TWO choices. Not more, not less: - choice #1: go back to the old allocation model. It's tested. It doesn't regress. Admittedly we may not know exactly _why_ it works, and it might not work on all machines, but it doesn't cause regressions (ie the machines it doesn't work on it _never_ worked on). And this doesn't mean old value for that _one_ machine. It means old value for _every_ machine. So it means we revert the whole bottom-down thing entirely. Not just change one random number so that the totally different allocation pattern happens to give the same result on one particular machine. Quite frankly, I don't see the point of doing top-to-bottom anyway, so I think we should do this regardless. Just revert the whole allocate from top. It didn't work for PCI, it's not working for this case either. Stop doing it. - Choice #2: understand exactly _what_ goes wrong, and fix it analytically (ie by _understanding_ the problem, and being able to solve it exactly, and in a way you can argue about without having to resort to magic happens). Now, the whole analytic approach (aka computer sciency approach), where you can actually think about the problem without having any pesky reality impact the solution is obviously the one we tend to prefer. Sadly, it's seldom the one we can use in reality when it comes to things like resource allocation, since we end up starting off with often buggy approximations of what the actual hardware is all about (ie broken firmware tables). So I'd love to know exactly why one random number works, and why another one doesn't. But as long as we do _not_ know the Why of it, we will have to revert. It really is that simple. It's _always_ that simple. So the numbers shouldn't be magic, they should have real explanations. And in the absense of real explanation, the model that works is this is what we've always done. Including, very much, the whole allocation order. Not just one random number on one random machine. Linus ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 04:39 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Yinghai Lu ying...@kernel.org wrote: What are all the magic numbers, and why would 0x8000 be special? that is the old value when kernel was doing bottom-up bootmem allocation. I understand, BUT THAT IS STILL A TOTALLY MAGIC NUMBER! It makes it come out the same ON THAT ONE MACHINE. So no, it's not the old value. It's a random value that gets the old value in one specific case. Alexandre's system is working 2.6.38.2 and kernel allocate from 0xa400 Joerg's system working 2.6.39-rc3 while revert the top down bootmem patch 1a4a678b12c84db9ae5dce424e0e97f0559bb57c and kernel allocate to 0x8000. Alexandre's system is working while increasing alignment to 1g, and make kernel to allocate 0x8000 to gart. they are not working if kernel allocate from 0xa000 the 0xa000 looks like same value from radon GTT. [4.250159] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.258830] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.266742] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.271549] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.275435] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896526 kiB. [4.282066] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.282085] usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [4.293076] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.298277] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [4.303218] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [4.309854] [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [4.315970] [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [4.320094] [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 Alex said that 0xa000 is ok and is from GPU address space --- The VRAM and GTT addresses in the dmesg are internal GPU addresses not system addresses. The GPU has it's own internal address space for on-chip memory clients (texture samplers, render buffers, display controllers, etc.). The GPU sets up two apertures in it's internal address space and on-chip client requests are forwarded to the appropriate place by the GPU's memory controller. Addresses in the GPU's VRAM aperture go to local vram on discrete cards, or to the stolen memory at the top of system memory for IGP cards. Addresses in the GPU's GTT aperture hit a page table and get forwarded to the appropriate dma pages. --- Why don't we write code that just works? Or absent a just works set of patches, why don't we revert to code that has years of testing? This kind of I broke things, so now I will jiggle things randomly until they unbreak is not acceptable. Either explain why that fixes a real BUG (and why the magic constants need to be what they are), or just revert the patch that caused the problem, and go back to the allocation patters that have years of experience. Guys, we've had this discussion before, in PCI allocation. We don't do this. We tried switching the PCI region allocations to top-down, and IT WAS A FAILURE. We reverted it to what we had years of testing with. Don't just make random changes. There really are only two acceptable models of development: think and analyze or years and years of testing on thousands of machines. Those two really do work. We did do the analyzing, and only difference seems to be: No. Yinghai, we have had this discussion before, and dammit, you need to understand the difference between understanding the problem and put in random values until it works on one machine. There was absolutely _zero_ analysis done. You do not actually understand WHY the numbers matter. You just look at two random numbers, and one works, the other does not. That's not analyzing. That's just random number games. If you cannot see and understand the difference between an actual analytical solution where you _understand_ what the code is doing and why, and random numbers that happen to work on one machine, I don't know what to tell you. good one is using 0x8000 and bad one is using 0xa000. We try to figure out if it needs low address and it happen to work because kernel was doing bottom up allocation. No. Let me repeat my point one more time. You have TWO choices. Not more, not less: - choice #1: go back to the old allocation model. It's tested. It doesn't regress. Admittedly we may not know exactly _why_ it works, and it might not work on all machines, but it doesn't cause regressions (ie the machines it doesn't work on it _never_ worked on). And this doesn't mean old value for that _one_ machine. It means old value for _every_ machine. So it means we revert the whole bottom-down thing entirely. Not just change one random number so that the totally different allocation pattern happens to give the same result on one particular machine. Quite frankly, I don't see the point of doing
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 12:14 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: so those two patches uncover some problems. [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xa000-0xa3ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ a000 so kernel try to reallocate apperture. because BIOS allocated is pointed to RAM or size is too small. but your radeon does use [0xa000, 0xbfff) [4.281993] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.290672] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.298550] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.309857] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.313748] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896524 kiB. [4.320379] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.324948] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.329832] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. and the one seems working: [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0x8000-0x83ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ 8000 [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xacb6bdc0-0xacb6bddf] BOOTMEM will use different position... [4.250159] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.258830] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.266742] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.271549] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.275435] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896526 kiB. [4.282066] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.282085] usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [4.293076] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.298277] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [4.303218] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [4.309854] [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [4.315970] [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [4.320094] [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 So question is why radeon is using the address [0xa000 - 0xc00], and in E820 it is RAM [0.00] BIOS-e820: 0010 - acb8d000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: acb8d000 - acb8f000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: acb8f000 - afce9000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afce9000 - afd21000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afd21000 - afd4f000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afd4f000 - afdcf000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afdcf000 - afecf000 (ACPI NVS) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afecf000 - afeff000 (ACPI data) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afeff000 - aff0 (usable) so looks bios program wrong address to the radon card? Okay, staring at this, it definitely seems toxic to overlay the GART over memory areas reserved by the BIOS. If I were to guess, I would say that the problem here seems to be that the kernel thinks it is overlaying 64 MiB of memory, but the actual GART is in fact 512 MiB in size -- 131072 CPU pages -- which now overlaps the BIOS reserved areas. Alex D., could you comment on the num cpu pages bit? -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On 04/13/2011 04:39 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: - Choice #2: understand exactly _what_ goes wrong, and fix it analytically (ie by _understanding_ the problem, and being able to solve it exactly, and in a way you can argue about without having to resort to magic happens). Now, the whole analytic approach (aka computer sciency approach), where you can actually think about the problem without having any pesky reality impact the solution is obviously the one we tend to prefer. Sadly, it's seldom the one we can use in reality when it comes to things like resource allocation, since we end up starting off with often buggy approximations of what the actual hardware is all about (ie broken firmware tables). So I'd love to know exactly why one random number works, and why another one doesn't. But as long as we do _not_ know the Why of it, we will have to revert. Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself in other ways on other systems. The other thing that this has uncovered is that we already have a bunch of complete b*llsh*t magic numbers in this path, some of which are trivially shown to be wrong or at least completely arbitrary, so there are more issues here :( -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 18:58 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 04/13/2011 12:14 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: so those two patches uncover some problems. [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xa000-0xa3ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ a000 so kernel try to reallocate apperture. because BIOS allocated is pointed to RAM or size is too small. but your radeon does use [0xa000, 0xbfff) [4.281993] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.290672] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.298550] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.309857] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.313748] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896524 kiB. [4.320379] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.324948] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.329832] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. and the one seems working: [0.00] Checking aperture... [0.00] No AGP bridge found [0.00] Node 0: aperture @ a000 size 32 MB [0.00] Aperture pointing to e820 RAM. Ignoring. [0.00] Your BIOS doesn't leave a aperture memory hole [0.00] Please enable the IOMMU option in the BIOS setup [0.00] This costs you 64 MB of RAM [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0x8000-0x83ff] aperture64 [0.00] Mapping aperture over 65536 KB of RAM @ 8000 [0.00] memblock_x86_reserve_range: [0xacb6bdc0-0xacb6bddf] BOOTMEM will use different position... [4.250159] radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) [4.258830] radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [4.266742] [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [4.271549] [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [4.275435] [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896526 kiB. [4.282066] [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [4.282085] usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [4.293076] [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [4.298277] [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [4.303218] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [4.309854] [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [4.315970] [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [4.320094] [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 So question is why radeon is using the address [0xa000 - 0xc00], and in E820 it is RAM [0.00] BIOS-e820: 0010 - acb8d000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: acb8d000 - acb8f000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: acb8f000 - afce9000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afce9000 - afd21000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afd21000 - afd4f000 (usable) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afd4f000 - afdcf000 (reserved) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afdcf000 - afecf000 (ACPI NVS) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afecf000 - afeff000 (ACPI data) [0.00] BIOS-e820: afeff000 - aff0 (usable) so looks bios program wrong address to the radon card? Okay, staring at this, it definitely seems toxic to overlay the GART over memory areas reserved by the BIOS. If I were to guess, I would say that the problem here seems to be that the kernel thinks it is overlaying 64 MiB of memory, but the actual GART is in fact 512 MiB in size -- 131072 CPU pages -- which now overlaps the BIOS reserved areas. Alex D., could you comment on the num cpu pages bit? These are not CPU addresses. I think we've stated that already. Not the droids. the num cpu pages is how many CPU pages would be needed to fill the GPU GTT, for those crazy cases where CPU pagesize != GPU pagesize. Dave. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote: Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself in other ways on other systems. The other thing that this has uncovered is that we already have a bunch of complete b*llsh*t magic numbers in this ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
Hello, On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:33:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote: Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself in other ways on other systems. sorry, fingerfart. Anyway, I agree 100%. we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not working, even if we do revert.. There were (and still are) places where memblock callers implemented ad-hoc top-down allocation by stepping down start limit until allocation succeeds. Several of them have been removed since top-down became the default behavior, so simply reverting the commit is likely to cause subtle issues. Maybe the best approach is introducing @topdown parameter and use it selectively for pure memory allocations. Thanks. -- tejun ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 05:40:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: Let's hope the release cycle continues like this. I _like_ it when people really seem to follow the whole big changes during the merge window rules. Sorry for disturbing the silence, but radeon seems to have issues. I tested -rc3 (and after that -rc1 which also has the issue) on my Laptop and it just reboots after (or while?) GFX initialization. The last lines of dmesg are: Freeing unused kernel memory: 624k freed Write protecting the kernel read-only data: 8192k Freeing unused kernel memory: 1456k freed Freeing unused kernel memory: 16k freed udev: starting version 151 udevd (62): /proc/62/oom_adj is deprecated, please use /proc/62/oom_score_adj instead. [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810 [drm] radeon defaulting to kernel modesetting. [drm] radeon kernel modesetting enabled. radeon :01:05.0: PCI INT A - GSI 18 (level, low) - IRQ 18 [drm] initializing kernel modesetting (RS880 0x1002:0x9712). [drm] register mmio base: 0xD640 [drm] register mmio size: 65536 ATOM BIOS: HP_TAG radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896512 kiB. usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 [drm] Loading RS780 Microcode radeon :01:05.0: WB enabled [drm] ring test succeeded in 1 usecs [drm] radeon: ib pool ready. The card is a Radeon Mobility 4200: 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc M880G [Mobility Radeon HD 4200] Subsystem: Hewlett-Packard Company Device 307e Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast TAbort- TAbort- MAbort- SERR- PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 18 Region 0: Memory at c000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M] Region 1: I/O ports at 6000 [size=256] Region 2: Memory at d640 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K] Region 5: Memory at d630 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1M] Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [a0] Message Signalled Interrupts: Mask- 64bit+ Queue=0/0 Enable- Address: Data: Kernel driver in use: radeon Kernel modules: radeon The problem does not happen with 2.6.38. I try to bisect this further down to a commit. Alex, please let me know if you need any further information. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:02 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 05:40:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: Let's hope the release cycle continues like this. I _like_ it when people really seem to follow the whole big changes during the merge window rules. Sorry for disturbing the silence, but radeon seems to have issues. I tested -rc3 (and after that -rc1 which also has the issue) on my Laptop and it just reboots after (or while?) GFX initialization. The last lines of dmesg are: Freeing unused kernel memory: 624k freed Write protecting the kernel read-only data: 8192k Freeing unused kernel memory: 1456k freed Freeing unused kernel memory: 16k freed udev: starting version 151 udevd (62): /proc/62/oom_adj is deprecated, please use /proc/62/oom_score_adj instead. [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810 [drm] radeon defaulting to kernel modesetting. [drm] radeon kernel modesetting enabled. radeon :01:05.0: PCI INT A - GSI 18 (level, low) - IRQ 18 [drm] initializing kernel modesetting (RS880 0x1002:0x9712). [drm] register mmio base: 0xD640 [drm] register mmio size: 65536 ATOM BIOS: HP_TAG radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896512 kiB. usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 [drm] Loading RS780 Microcode radeon :01:05.0: WB enabled [drm] ring test succeeded in 1 usecs [drm] radeon: ib pool ready. The card is a Radeon Mobility 4200: 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc M880G [Mobility Radeon HD 4200] Subsystem: Hewlett-Packard Company Device 307e Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast TAbort- TAbort- MAbort- SERR- PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 18 Region 0: Memory at c000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M] Region 1: I/O ports at 6000 [size=256] Region 2: Memory at d640 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K] Region 5: Memory at d630 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1M] Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [a0] Message Signalled Interrupts: Mask- 64bit+ Queue=0/0 Enable- Address: Data: Kernel driver in use: radeon Kernel modules: radeon The problem does not happen with 2.6.38. I try to bisect this further down to a commit. Alex, please let me know if you need any further information. If you can bisect it, that would be great. Thanks, Alex Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:15:11AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:02 AM, Joerg Roedel j...@8bytes.org wrote: On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 05:40:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: Let's hope the release cycle continues like this. I _like_ it when people really seem to follow the whole big changes during the merge window rules. Sorry for disturbing the silence, but radeon seems to have issues. I tested -rc3 (and after that -rc1 which also has the issue) on my Laptop and it just reboots after (or while?) GFX initialization. The last lines of dmesg are: Freeing unused kernel memory: 624k freed Write protecting the kernel read-only data: 8192k Freeing unused kernel memory: 1456k freed Freeing unused kernel memory: 16k freed udev: starting version 151 udevd (62): /proc/62/oom_adj is deprecated, please use /proc/62/oom_score_adj instead. [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810 [drm] radeon defaulting to kernel modesetting. [drm] radeon kernel modesetting enabled. radeon :01:05.0: PCI INT A - GSI 18 (level, low) - IRQ 18 [drm] initializing kernel modesetting (RS880 0x1002:0x9712). [drm] register mmio base: 0xD640 [drm] register mmio size: 65536 ATOM BIOS: HP_TAG radeon :01:05.0: VRAM: 320M 0xC000 - 0xD3FF (320M used) radeon :01:05.0: GTT: 512M 0xA000 - 0xBFFF [drm] Detected VRAM RAM=320M, BAR=256M [drm] RAM width 32bits DDR [TTM] Zone kernel: Available graphics memory: 1896512 kiB. usb 7-2: new full speed USB device number 2 using ohci_hcd [TTM] Initializing pool allocator. [drm] radeon: 320M of VRAM memory ready [drm] radeon: 512M of GTT memory ready. [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010). [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query. [drm] radeon: irq initialized. [drm] GART: num cpu pages 131072, num gpu pages 131072 [drm] Loading RS780 Microcode radeon :01:05.0: WB enabled [drm] ring test succeeded in 1 usecs [drm] radeon: ib pool ready. The card is a Radeon Mobility 4200: 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc M880G [Mobility Radeon HD 4200] Subsystem: Hewlett-Packard Company Device 307e Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast TAbort- TAbort- MAbort- SERR- PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 18 Region 0: Memory at c000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M] Region 1: I/O ports at 6000 [size=256] Region 2: Memory at d640 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K] Region 5: Memory at d630 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1M] Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [a0] Message Signalled Interrupts: Mask- 64bit+ Queue=0/0 Enable- Address: Data: Kernel driver in use: radeon Kernel modules: radeon The problem does not happen with 2.6.38. I try to bisect this further down to a commit. Alex, please let me know if you need any further information. If you can bisect it, that would be great. Thanks, Bisecting actually gave a very weird result. It points to d2137d5af4259f50c19addb8246a186c9ffac325 which is a merge-commit in the x86 tree. Even more weird is that this notebook is the only machine with these symptoms, all my other boxes are fine. During the bisect I tested commits from Yinghai which were good. It seems like the problem appeared with the merge. Joerg ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
Already tracking it here: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012 Same problem, same culprit commit. -- Alexandre Demers ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: Linux 2.6.39-rc3
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Joerg Roedel wrote: Bisecting actually gave a very weird result. It points to d2137d5af4259f50c19addb8246a186c9ffac325 which is a merge-commit in the x86 tree. Even more weird is that this notebook is the only machine with these symptoms, all my other boxes are fine. During the bisect I tested commits from Yinghai which were good. It seems like the problem appeared with the merge. Alexandre Demers (cc'd) reports a boot failure bisected to the same merge on a 64-bit AMD tricore in https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33012. We're awaiting earlyprintk= output from that kernel, if possible, and Yinghai asked for his .config and dmesg output from the last known working kernel. ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
