From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 303D5C54E41 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7AC610E947; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:11:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="g3bMKRZR"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from madrid.collaboradmins.com (madrid.collaboradmins.com [46.235.227.194]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C1AD10E3A2; Tue, 27 Feb 2024 18:15:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1709057701; bh=+YGlht2j8DKNiyJTxizt7m7K6VT5e57wafvM3lFhmI0=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=g3bMKRZR8z46141kcoZ+/3ISYqCWcnf2sDx309BP6HtZ5OMyM1xvUwcax9hAxy/B5 91N9GfiPOvoR2alFxNnQpooyTqAtUmAs7HqMK4pX8L7whYcPnyjZUgKN1r8u4hdUH+ UJyn17e6HXA+5rPlTmHYhxPngj5uSP3icELO1rnNY5dGY7bN42Ot7nvW4LvB+ot4SJ CAUG+el9HsuiCmXP9KodUlbfOb8o2QlAVUATRalEsdXHFC1EaJ+nxfqwvOz5fR26aK b7fTsR1RrX7ubrIkRzSSVbLTTyjQTwLI9hmQapb+GkZp7FmwoVVsFrg2CWGAe2iGdc bLXAlX4YE+fZQ== Received: from [100.109.49.129] (cola.collaboradmins.com [195.201.22.229]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dmitry.osipenko) by madrid.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CDEBB378000B; Tue, 27 Feb 2024 18:14:59 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 21:14:57 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] drm: Fix reservation locking for pin/unpin and console To: Thomas Zimmermann , daniel@ffwll.ch, airlied@gmail.com, mripard@kernel.org, maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, christian.koenig@amd.com, sumit.semwal@linaro.org, robdclark@gmail.com, quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com, dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org, sean@poorly.run, marijn.suijten@somainline.org, suijingfeng@loongson.cn, kherbst@redhat.com, lyude@redhat.com, dakr@redhat.com, airlied@redhat.com, kraxel@redhat.com, alexander.deucher@amd.com, Xinhui.Pan@amd.com, zack.rusin@broadcom.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org References: <20240227113853.8464-1-tzimmermann@suse.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Dmitry Osipenko In-Reply-To: <20240227113853.8464-1-tzimmermann@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:11:04 +0000 X-BeenThere: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for AMD gfx List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: amd-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "amd-gfx" Hello, Thank you for the patches! On 2/27/24 13:14, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Dma-buf locking semantics require the caller of pin and unpin to hold > the buffer's reservation lock. Fix DRM to adhere to the specs. This > enables to fix the locking in DRM's console emulation. Similar changes > for vmap and mmap have been posted at [1][2] > > Most DRM drivers and memory managers acquire the buffer object's > reservation lock within their GEM pin and unpin callbacks. This > violates dma-buf locking semantics. We get away with it because PRIME > does not provide pin/unpin, but attach/detach, for which the locking > semantics is correct. > > Patches 1 to 8 rework DRM GEM code in various implementations to > acquire the reservation lock when entering the pin and unpin callbacks. > This prepares them for the next patch. Drivers that are not affected > by these patches either don't acquire the reservation lock (amdgpu) > or don't need preparation (loongson). > > Patch 9 moves reservation locking from the GEM pin/unpin callbacks > into drm_gem_pin() and drm_gem_unpin(). As PRIME uses these functions > internally it still gets the reservation lock. > > With the updated GEM callbacks, the rest of the patchset fixes the > fbdev emulation's buffer locking. Fbdev emulation needs to keep its > GEM buffer object inplace while updating its content. This required > a implicit pinning and apparently amdgpu didn't do this at all. > > Patch 10 introduces drm_client_buffer_vmap_local() and _vunmap_local(). > The former function map a GEM buffer into the kernel's address space > with regular vmap operations, but keeps holding the reservation lock. > The _vunmap_local() helper undoes the vmap and releases the lock. The > updated GEM callbacks make this possible. Between the two calls, the > fbdev emulation can update the buffer content without have the buffer > moved or evicted. Update fbdev-generic to use vmap_local helpers, > which fix amdgpu. The idea of adding a "local vmap" has previously been > attempted at [3] in a different form. > > Patch 11 adds implicit pinning to the DRM client's regular vmap > helper so that long-term vmap'ed buffers won't be evicted. This only > affects fbdev-dma, but GEM DMA helpers don't require pinning. So > there are no practical changes. > > Patches 12 and 13 remove implicit pinning from the vmap and vunmap > operations in gem-vram and qxl. These pin operations are not supposed > to be part of vmap code, but were required to keep the buffers in place > for fbdev emulation. With the conversion o ffbdev-generic to to > vmap_local helpers, that code can finally be removed. Isn't it a common behaviour for all DRM drivers to implicitly pin BO while it's vmapped? I was sure it should be common /o\ Why would you want to kmap BO that isn't pinned? Shouldn't TTM's vmap() be changed to do the pinning? I missed that TTM doesn't pin BO on vmap() and now surprised to see it. It should be a rather serious problem requiring backporting of the fixes, but I don't see the fixes tags on the patches (?) -- Best regards, Dmitry