Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:59:10 +0200 | Subject | Re: (REGRESSION bisected) Re: amdgpu errors (VM fault / GPU fault detected) with 5.19 merge window snapshots | From | Christian König <> |
| |
Am 01.06.22 um 16:55 schrieb Alex Deucher: > On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 8:58 AM Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> 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
|  |