diff mbox

drm/i915: Don't WARN about unexpected hpd interrupts on gmch platforms

Message ID 1397323882-31195-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Daniel Vetter April 12, 2014, 5:31 p.m. UTC
The status bits are unconditionally set, the control bits only enable
the actual interrupt generation. Which means if we get some random
other interrupts we'll bogusly complain about them.

So restrict the WARN to platforms with a sane hotplug interrupt
handling scheme.

This WARN has been introduced in

commit b8f102e8bf71cacf33326360fdf9dcfd1a63925b
Author: Egbert Eich <eich@suse.de>
Date:   Fri Jul 26 14:14:24 2013 +0200

    drm/i915: Add messages useful for HPD storm detection debugging (v2)

Cc: Egbert Eich <eich@suse.de>
Cc: bitlord <bitlord0xff@gmail.com>
Reported-by: bitlord <bitlord0xff@gmail.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 18 ++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Comments

Egbert Eich April 12, 2014, 6:12 p.m. UTC | #1
Daniel Vetter writes:
 > The status bits are unconditionally set, the control bits only enable
 > the actual interrupt generation. Which means if we get some random
 > other interrupts we'll bogusly complain about them.
 > 
 > So restrict the WARN to platforms with a sane hotplug interrupt
 > handling scheme.
 > 
 > This WARN has been introduced in
 > 
 > commit b8f102e8bf71cacf33326360fdf9dcfd1a63925b
 > Author: Egbert Eich <eich@suse.de>
 > Date:   Fri Jul 26 14:14:24 2013 +0200
 > 
 >     drm/i915: Add messages useful for HPD storm detection debugging (v2)
 > 
 > Cc: Egbert Eich <eich@suse.de>
 > Cc: bitlord <bitlord0xff@gmail.com>
 > Reported-by: bitlord <bitlord0xff@gmail.com>
 > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
 > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 > ---
 >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 18 ++++++++++++++----
 >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
 > 
 > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
 > index 7753249b3a95..f98ba4e6e70b 100644
 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
 > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
 > @@ -1362,10 +1362,20 @@ static inline void intel_hpd_irq_handler(struct drm_device *dev,
 >  	spin_lock(&dev_priv->irq_lock);
 >  	for (i = 1; i < HPD_NUM_PINS; i++) {
 >  
 > -		WARN_ONCE(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
 > -			  dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED,
 > -			  "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
 > -			  hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
 > +		if (hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
 > +		    dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED) {
 > +			/*
 > +			 * On GMCH platforms the interrupt mask bits only
 > +			 * prevent irq generation, not the setting of the
 > +			 * hotplug bits itself. So only WARN about unexpected
 > +			 * interrupts on saner platforms.
 > +			 */
 > +			WARN_ONCE(INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 5 && !IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev),
 > +				  "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
 > +				  hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);

Personally I'd prefer the condition in the WARN..() macro to be the 
unexpected condition you want to warn about. This makes it easier for
anybody not up to speed with the details of hotplug handling to understand
the code. 
Of course the way you structure this avoids a lot of unnecessary tests.
But if this is a concern maybe the entire for loop should be restructured
with 

if (!(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger))
   	     continue;

right at the beginning.

 > +
 > +			continue;
 > +		}
 >  
 >  		if (!(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger) ||
 >  		    dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark != HPD_ENABLED)
 > -- 
 > 1.8.5.2

Cheers,
	Egbert.
Daniel Vetter April 12, 2014, 6:38 p.m. UTC | #2
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Egbert Eich <eich@freedesktop.org> wrote:
>  > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>  > index 7753249b3a95..f98ba4e6e70b 100644
>  > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>  > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>  > @@ -1362,10 +1362,20 @@ static inline void intel_hpd_irq_handler(struct drm_device *dev,
>  >      spin_lock(&dev_priv->irq_lock);
>  >      for (i = 1; i < HPD_NUM_PINS; i++) {
>  >
>  > -            WARN_ONCE(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
>  > -                      dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED,
>  > -                      "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
>  > -                      hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
>  > +            if (hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
>  > +                dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED) {
>  > +                    /*
>  > +                     * On GMCH platforms the interrupt mask bits only
>  > +                     * prevent irq generation, not the setting of the
>  > +                     * hotplug bits itself. So only WARN about unexpected
>  > +                     * interrupts on saner platforms.
>  > +                     */
>  > +                    WARN_ONCE(INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 5 && !IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev),
>  > +                              "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
>  > +                              hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
>
> Personally I'd prefer the condition in the WARN..() macro to be the
> unexpected condition you want to warn about. This makes it easier for
> anybody not up to speed with the details of hotplug handling to understand
> the code.
> Of course the way you structure this avoids a lot of unnecessary tests.
> But if this is a concern maybe the entire for loop should be restructured
> with
>
> if (!(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger))
>              continue;
>
> right at the beginning.
>
>  > +
>  > +                    continue;
>  > +            }


We want to skip the hpd handling in any case if the interrupt is
blocked, otherwise every time we have some unrelated interrupt on gmch
platforms while a hpd storm is ongoing we'll fire off the hotplug
work. Which we obviously don't want since that defeats the point of
the storm handling code.

But we only want to WARN on platforms where we can reliably stop the
status bits too, hence why I've nested the checks like this.
-Daniel
Jani Nikula April 24, 2014, 8:11 a.m. UTC | #3
On Sat, 12 Apr 2014, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Egbert Eich <eich@freedesktop.org> wrote:
>>  > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>  > index 7753249b3a95..f98ba4e6e70b 100644
>>  > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>  > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>  > @@ -1362,10 +1362,20 @@ static inline void intel_hpd_irq_handler(struct drm_device *dev,
>>  >      spin_lock(&dev_priv->irq_lock);
>>  >      for (i = 1; i < HPD_NUM_PINS; i++) {
>>  >
>>  > -            WARN_ONCE(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
>>  > -                      dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED,
>>  > -                      "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
>>  > -                      hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
>>  > +            if (hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
>>  > +                dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED) {
>>  > +                    /*
>>  > +                     * On GMCH platforms the interrupt mask bits only
>>  > +                     * prevent irq generation, not the setting of the
>>  > +                     * hotplug bits itself. So only WARN about unexpected
>>  > +                     * interrupts on saner platforms.
>>  > +                     */
>>  > +                    WARN_ONCE(INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 5 && !IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev),
>>  > +                              "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
>>  > +                              hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
>>
>> Personally I'd prefer the condition in the WARN..() macro to be the
>> unexpected condition you want to warn about. This makes it easier for
>> anybody not up to speed with the details of hotplug handling to understand
>> the code.
>> Of course the way you structure this avoids a lot of unnecessary tests.
>> But if this is a concern maybe the entire for loop should be restructured
>> with
>>
>> if (!(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger))
>>              continue;
>>
>> right at the beginning.
>>
>>  > +
>>  > +                    continue;
>>  > +            }
>
>
> We want to skip the hpd handling in any case if the interrupt is
> blocked, otherwise every time we have some unrelated interrupt on gmch
> platforms while a hpd storm is ongoing we'll fire off the hotplug
> work. Which we obviously don't want since that defeats the point of
> the storm handling code.

IMO this skipping the rest of hpd handling is actually the bigger (and
an actual functional) change here, but the commit message only talks
about limiting the WARN. Please amend the commit message.

BR,
Jani.


>
> But we only want to WARN on platforms where we can reliably stop the
> status bits too, hence why I've nested the checks like this.
> -Daniel
> -- 
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
index 7753249b3a95..f98ba4e6e70b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
@@ -1362,10 +1362,20 @@  static inline void intel_hpd_irq_handler(struct drm_device *dev,
 	spin_lock(&dev_priv->irq_lock);
 	for (i = 1; i < HPD_NUM_PINS; i++) {
 
-		WARN_ONCE(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
-			  dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED,
-			  "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
-			  hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
+		if (hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger &&
+		    dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark == HPD_DISABLED) {
+			/*
+			 * On GMCH platforms the interrupt mask bits only
+			 * prevent irq generation, not the setting of the
+			 * hotplug bits itself. So only WARN about unexpected
+			 * interrupts on saner platforms.
+			 */
+			WARN_ONCE(INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 5 && !IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev),
+				  "Received HPD interrupt (0x%08x) on pin %d (0x%08x) although disabled\n",
+				  hotplug_trigger, i, hpd[i]);
+
+			continue;
+		}
 
 		if (!(hpd[i] & hotplug_trigger) ||
 		    dev_priv->hpd_stats[i].hpd_mark != HPD_ENABLED)