Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] drm/amd/display: add DMU timeout recovery support

Hamza Mahfooz <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.freedesktop.lists.amd-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 04:41:44PM +0300, LetsDank wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have been seeing what appears to be the same failure on an MSI Bravo
> 15 C7VF with a Ryzen 5 7535HS / Rembrandt Radeon 660M (1002:1681), an
> internal 1920x1080 144 Hz eDP panel, and KDE X11. It occurred on Fedora
> kernels 6.19 and 7.1.3. The relevant signatures included:
> 
>   flip_done timed out
>   commit wait timed out
>   Error queueing DMUB command: status=2
> 
> Using amdgpu.dcdebugmask=0x810 has avoided the failure for more than 53
> hours across four boots, including one continuous run longer than 27
> hours.
> 
> I built this v6 series on top of v7.2-rc3 and booted it with:
> 
>   amdgpu.dcdebugmask=0 amdgpu.gpu_recovery=1
> 
> It passed five DPMS off/on cycles, five modeset cycles between 60 Hz and
> 144 Hz, and a short fullscreen rendering test. It then ran a normal KDE
> X11 workload for about 12.5 hours without any DMUB queue-full, DMCUB, or
> page-flip timeout message.
> 
> The original intermittent timeout did not occur during that run, so I
> cannot offer a Tested-by for the recovery path.
> 
> After about 12.5 hours the test kernel hit a separate gfxhub VM page
> fault attributed to Xorg, followed by a gfx_0.0.0 ring timeout and a
> successful ring reset. Mesa then aborted Xorg. There were no DMUB,
> DMCUB, or flip timeout messages in that incident. I preserved the full
> AMDGPU devcoredump and symbolized userspace coredumps if they would be
> useful as a separate report.
> 
> Patch 1 also needed a small API adaptation on v7.2-rc3 from
> drm_atomic_state and drm_atomic_state_*() to drm_atomic_commit and
> drm_atomic_commit_*(). The resulting kernel built cleanly, and all three
> commits passed checkpatch.pl --strict. I can send that fixup if it would
> help with a respin.
> 
> Is this series still being worked on, and would testing a revised version
> on this Rembrandt system be useful?

I haven't had much time to work on this, though if you look at the
previous thread [1] the whole idea around having a recovery path for KMS
was NACKed by Ville. So, it doesn't appear to me that there is much of
an appetite for this.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]/
> 
> Regards,
> LetsDank
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.