| Message ID | 20240126153453.997855-1-xiaoming.wang@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/xe/display: Fix memleak in display initialization | expand |
+Jani On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 11:34:53PM +0800, wangxiaoming321 wrote: >intel_power_domains_init has been called twice in xe_device_probe: >xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_nommio -> intel_power_domains_init(xe) >xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_noirq -> intel_display_driver_probe_noirq >-> intel_power_domains_init(i915) ok, once upon a time intel_power_domains_init() was called by the driver initialization code and not initialized inside the display. I think. Now it's part of the display probe and we never updated the xe side. > >It needs remove one to avoid power_domains->power_wells double malloc. > >unreferenced object 0xffff88811150ee00 (size 512): > comm "systemd-udevd", pid 506, jiffies 4294674198 (age 3605.560s) > hex dump (first 32 bytes): > 10 b4 9d a0 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ................ > ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ > backtrace: > [<ffffffff8134b901>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x1c1/0x2b0 > [<ffffffff812c98b2>] __kmalloc+0x52/0x150 > [<ffffffffa08b0033>] __set_power_wells+0xc3/0x360 [xe] > [<ffffffffa08562fc>] xe_display_init_nommio+0x4c/0x70 [xe] > [<ffffffffa07f0d1c>] xe_device_probe+0x3c/0x5a0 [xe] > [<ffffffffa082e48f>] xe_pci_probe+0x33f/0x5a0 [xe] > [<ffffffff817f2187>] local_pci_probe+0x47/0xa0 > [<ffffffff817f3db3>] pci_device_probe+0xc3/0x1f0 > [<ffffffff8192f2a2>] really_probe+0x1a2/0x410 > [<ffffffff8192f598>] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x160 > [<ffffffff8192f6ae>] driver_probe_device+0x1e/0x90 > [<ffffffff8192f92a>] __driver_attach+0xda/0x1d0 > [<ffffffff8192c95c>] bus_for_each_dev+0x7c/0xd0 > [<ffffffff8192e159>] bus_add_driver+0x119/0x220 > [<ffffffff81930d00>] driver_register+0x60/0x120 > [<ffffffffa05e50a0>] 0xffffffffa05e50a0 > This will need a Fixes trailer. This seems to be a suitable one: Fixes: 44e694958b95 ("drm/xe/display: Implement display support") >Signed-off-by: wangxiaoming321 <xiaoming.wang@intel.com> >--- > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c | 6 ------ > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >index 74391d9b11ae..e4db069f0db3 100644 >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >@@ -134,8 +134,6 @@ static void xe_display_fini_nommio(struct drm_device *dev, void *dummy) > > int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) > { >- int err; >- > if (!xe->info.enable_display) > return 0; > >@@ -145,10 +143,6 @@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) > /* This must be called before any calls to HAS_PCH_* */ > intel_detect_pch(xe); > >- err = intel_power_domains_init(xe); >- if (err) >- return err; xe_display_init_nommio() has xe_display_fini_nommio() as its destructor counter part. Unfortunately display side looks wrong as it does: init: intel_display_driver_probe_noirq() -> intel_power_domains_init() destroy: i915_driver_late_release() -> intel_power_domains_cleanup() I think leaving intel_power_domains_cleanup() as is for now so it's called by xe works, but this needs to go through CI, which apparently this series didn't go. I re-triggered it. +Jani if he thinks this can be changed in another way or already have the complete solution. Lucas De Marchi
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> wrote: > +Jani > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 11:34:53PM +0800, wangxiaoming321 wrote: >>intel_power_domains_init has been called twice in xe_device_probe: >>xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_nommio -> intel_power_domains_init(xe) >>xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_noirq -> intel_display_driver_probe_noirq >>-> intel_power_domains_init(i915) > > ok, once upon a time intel_power_domains_init() was called by the driver > initialization code and not initialized inside the display. I think. > Now it's part of the display probe and we never updated the xe side. > >> >>It needs remove one to avoid power_domains->power_wells double malloc. >> >>unreferenced object 0xffff88811150ee00 (size 512): >> comm "systemd-udevd", pid 506, jiffies 4294674198 (age 3605.560s) >> hex dump (first 32 bytes): >> 10 b4 9d a0 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ................ >> ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ >> backtrace: >> [<ffffffff8134b901>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x1c1/0x2b0 >> [<ffffffff812c98b2>] __kmalloc+0x52/0x150 >> [<ffffffffa08b0033>] __set_power_wells+0xc3/0x360 [xe] >> [<ffffffffa08562fc>] xe_display_init_nommio+0x4c/0x70 [xe] >> [<ffffffffa07f0d1c>] xe_device_probe+0x3c/0x5a0 [xe] >> [<ffffffffa082e48f>] xe_pci_probe+0x33f/0x5a0 [xe] >> [<ffffffff817f2187>] local_pci_probe+0x47/0xa0 >> [<ffffffff817f3db3>] pci_device_probe+0xc3/0x1f0 >> [<ffffffff8192f2a2>] really_probe+0x1a2/0x410 >> [<ffffffff8192f598>] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x160 >> [<ffffffff8192f6ae>] driver_probe_device+0x1e/0x90 >> [<ffffffff8192f92a>] __driver_attach+0xda/0x1d0 >> [<ffffffff8192c95c>] bus_for_each_dev+0x7c/0xd0 >> [<ffffffff8192e159>] bus_add_driver+0x119/0x220 >> [<ffffffff81930d00>] driver_register+0x60/0x120 >> [<ffffffffa05e50a0>] 0xffffffffa05e50a0 >> > > This will need a Fixes trailer. This seems to be a suitable one: > > Fixes: 44e694958b95 ("drm/xe/display: Implement display support") > >>Signed-off-by: wangxiaoming321 <xiaoming.wang@intel.com> >>--- >> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c | 6 ------ >> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) >> >>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >>index 74391d9b11ae..e4db069f0db3 100644 >>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >>@@ -134,8 +134,6 @@ static void xe_display_fini_nommio(struct drm_device *dev, void *dummy) >> >> int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) >> { >>- int err; >>- >> if (!xe->info.enable_display) >> return 0; >> >>@@ -145,10 +143,6 @@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) >> /* This must be called before any calls to HAS_PCH_* */ >> intel_detect_pch(xe); >> >>- err = intel_power_domains_init(xe); >>- if (err) >>- return err; > > xe_display_init_nommio() has xe_display_fini_nommio() as its destructor > counter part. Unfortunately display side looks wrong as it does: > > init: > intel_display_driver_probe_noirq() -> intel_power_domains_init() > > destroy: > i915_driver_late_release() -> intel_power_domains_cleanup() > > I think leaving intel_power_domains_cleanup() as is for now so it's > called by xe works, but this needs to go through CI, which apparently > this series didn't go. I re-triggered it. > > +Jani if he thinks this can be changed in another way or already have > the complete solution. I don't. But it is and will be a recurring problem. i915 and xe core drivers should handle display init and cleanup the same way. But currently i915 goes on to call e.g. intel_power_domains_cleanup() directly from top level driver code. There are other examples. And we seem to have recently added *more*. See e.g. bd738d859e71 ("drm/i915: Prevent modesets during driver init/shutdown"). BR, Jani.
On 2024-01-31 16:07, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2024, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> wrote: >> +Jani >> >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 11:34:53PM +0800, wangxiaoming321 wrote: >>> intel_power_domains_init has been called twice in xe_device_probe: >>> xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_nommio -> intel_power_domains_init(xe) >>> xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_noirq -> intel_display_driver_probe_noirq >>> -> intel_power_domains_init(i915) >> >> ok, once upon a time intel_power_domains_init() was called by the driver >> initialization code and not initialized inside the display. I think. >> Now it's part of the display probe and we never updated the xe side. >> >>> >>> It needs remove one to avoid power_domains->power_wells double malloc. >>> >>> unreferenced object 0xffff88811150ee00 (size 512): >>> comm "systemd-udevd", pid 506, jiffies 4294674198 (age 3605.560s) >>> hex dump (first 32 bytes): >>> 10 b4 9d a0 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ................ >>> ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ >>> backtrace: >>> [<ffffffff8134b901>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x1c1/0x2b0 >>> [<ffffffff812c98b2>] __kmalloc+0x52/0x150 >>> [<ffffffffa08b0033>] __set_power_wells+0xc3/0x360 [xe] >>> [<ffffffffa08562fc>] xe_display_init_nommio+0x4c/0x70 [xe] >>> [<ffffffffa07f0d1c>] xe_device_probe+0x3c/0x5a0 [xe] >>> [<ffffffffa082e48f>] xe_pci_probe+0x33f/0x5a0 [xe] >>> [<ffffffff817f2187>] local_pci_probe+0x47/0xa0 >>> [<ffffffff817f3db3>] pci_device_probe+0xc3/0x1f0 >>> [<ffffffff8192f2a2>] really_probe+0x1a2/0x410 >>> [<ffffffff8192f598>] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x160 >>> [<ffffffff8192f6ae>] driver_probe_device+0x1e/0x90 >>> [<ffffffff8192f92a>] __driver_attach+0xda/0x1d0 >>> [<ffffffff8192c95c>] bus_for_each_dev+0x7c/0xd0 >>> [<ffffffff8192e159>] bus_add_driver+0x119/0x220 >>> [<ffffffff81930d00>] driver_register+0x60/0x120 >>> [<ffffffffa05e50a0>] 0xffffffffa05e50a0 >>> >> >> This will need a Fixes trailer. This seems to be a suitable one: >> >> Fixes: 44e694958b95 ("drm/xe/display: Implement display support") >> >>> Signed-off-by: wangxiaoming321 <xiaoming.wang@intel.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c | 6 ------ >>> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >>> index 74391d9b11ae..e4db069f0db3 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c >>> @@ -134,8 +134,6 @@ static void xe_display_fini_nommio(struct drm_device *dev, void *dummy) >>> >>> int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) >>> { >>> - int err; >>> - >>> if (!xe->info.enable_display) >>> return 0; >>> >>> @@ -145,10 +143,6 @@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) >>> /* This must be called before any calls to HAS_PCH_* */ >>> intel_detect_pch(xe); >>> >>> - err = intel_power_domains_init(xe); >>> - if (err) >>> - return err; >> >> xe_display_init_nommio() has xe_display_fini_nommio() as its destructor >> counter part. Unfortunately display side looks wrong as it does: >> >> init: >> intel_display_driver_probe_noirq() -> intel_power_domains_init() >> >> destroy: >> i915_driver_late_release() -> intel_power_domains_cleanup() >> >> I think leaving intel_power_domains_cleanup() as is for now so it's >> called by xe works, but this needs to go through CI, which apparently >> this series didn't go. I re-triggered it. >> >> +Jani if he thinks this can be changed in another way or already have >> the complete solution. > > I don't. But it is and will be a recurring problem. i915 and xe core > drivers should handle display init and cleanup the same way. But > currently i915 goes on to call e.g. intel_power_domains_cleanup() > directly from top level driver code. There are other examples. > > And we seem to have recently added *more*. See e.g. bd738d859e71 > ("drm/i915: Prevent modesets during driver init/shutdown"). That commit seems terrible Should we instead not only enable any code that can cause modesets after it's safe to do so? Cheers, ~Maarten
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c index 74391d9b11ae..e4db069f0db3 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c @@ -134,8 +134,6 @@ static void xe_display_fini_nommio(struct drm_device *dev, void *dummy) int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) { - int err; - if (!xe->info.enable_display) return 0; @@ -145,10 +143,6 @@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_device *xe) /* This must be called before any calls to HAS_PCH_* */ intel_detect_pch(xe); - err = intel_power_domains_init(xe); - if (err) - return err; - return drmm_add_action_or_reset(&xe->drm, xe_display_fini_nommio, xe); }
intel_power_domains_init has been called twice in xe_device_probe: xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_nommio -> intel_power_domains_init(xe) xe_device_probe -> xe_display_init_noirq -> intel_display_driver_probe_noirq -> intel_power_domains_init(i915) It needs remove one to avoid power_domains->power_wells double malloc. unreferenced object 0xffff88811150ee00 (size 512): comm "systemd-udevd", pid 506, jiffies 4294674198 (age 3605.560s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 10 b4 9d a0 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ................ ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace: [<ffffffff8134b901>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x1c1/0x2b0 [<ffffffff812c98b2>] __kmalloc+0x52/0x150 [<ffffffffa08b0033>] __set_power_wells+0xc3/0x360 [xe] [<ffffffffa08562fc>] xe_display_init_nommio+0x4c/0x70 [xe] [<ffffffffa07f0d1c>] xe_device_probe+0x3c/0x5a0 [xe] [<ffffffffa082e48f>] xe_pci_probe+0x33f/0x5a0 [xe] [<ffffffff817f2187>] local_pci_probe+0x47/0xa0 [<ffffffff817f3db3>] pci_device_probe+0xc3/0x1f0 [<ffffffff8192f2a2>] really_probe+0x1a2/0x410 [<ffffffff8192f598>] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x160 [<ffffffff8192f6ae>] driver_probe_device+0x1e/0x90 [<ffffffff8192f92a>] __driver_attach+0xda/0x1d0 [<ffffffff8192c95c>] bus_for_each_dev+0x7c/0xd0 [<ffffffff8192e159>] bus_add_driver+0x119/0x220 [<ffffffff81930d00>] driver_register+0x60/0x120 [<ffffffffa05e50a0>] 0xffffffffa05e50a0 Signed-off-by: wangxiaoming321 <xiaoming.wang@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_display.c | 6 ------ 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)