Re: (REGRESSION bisected) Re: amdgpu errors (VM fault / GPU fault detected) with 5.19 merge window snapshots

[Christian König]

Am 01.06.22 um 16:55 schrieb Alex Deucher:
> On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 8:58 AM Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:00:39AM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > while testing 5.19 merge window snapshots (commits babf0bb978e3 and
> > > 7e284070abe5), I keep getting errors like below. I have not seen them
> > > with 5.18 final or older.
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > [  247.150333] gmc_v8_0_process_interrupt: 46 callbacks suppressed
> > > [  247.150336] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu: GPU fault detected: 147 0x00020802 for process firefox pid 6101 thread firefox:cs0 pid 6116
> > > [  247.150339] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu:   VM_CONTEXT1_PROTECTION_FAULT_ADDR   0x00107800
> > > [  247.150340] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu:   VM_CONTEXT1_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS 0x0D008002
> > > [  247.150341] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu: VM fault (0x02, vmid 6, pasid 32780) at page 1079296, write from 'TC2' (0x54433200) (8)
> > [...]
> > > [  249.925909] amdgpu 0000:0c:00.0: amdgpu: IH ring buffer overflow (0x000844C0, 0x00004A00, 0x000044D0)
> > > [  250.434986] [drm] Fence fallback timer expired on ring sdma0
> > > [  466.621568] gmc_v8_0_process_interrupt: 122 callbacks suppressed
> > [...]
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > There does not seem to be any apparent immediate problem with graphics
> > > but when running commit babf0bb978e3, there seemed to be a noticeable
> > > lag in some operations, e.g. when moving a window or repainting large
> > > part of the terminal window in konsole (no idea if it's related).
> > >
> > > My GPU is Radeon Pro WX 2100 (1002:6995). What other information should
> > > I collect to help debugging the issue?
> > Bisected to commit 5255e146c99a ("drm/amdgpu: rework TLB flushing").
> > There seem to be later commits depending on it so I did not test
> > a revert on top of current mainline.
> @Christian Koenig, @Yang, Philip Any ideas?  I think there were some
> fix ups for this.  Maybe those just haven't hit the tree yet?

I need to double check, but as far as I know we have fixed all the fallout.

Could be that something didn't went upstream because it came to late for 
the merge window.

Christian.

> Alex
>
>
> > I should also mention that most commits tested as "bad" during the
> > bisect did behave much worse than current mainline (errors starting as
> > early as with sddm, visibly damaged screen content, sometimes even
> > crashes). But all of them issued messages similar to those above into
> > kernel log.
> >
> > Michal Kubecek