From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm: add cache support for arm64
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:38:08 +0100
Message-ID: <20190807123807.GD54191@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <20190805211451.20176-1-robdclark@gmail.com>
 <20190806084821.GA17129@lst.de>
 <CAJs_Fx6eh1w7c=crMoD5XyEOMzP6orLhqUewErE51cPGYmObBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190806143457.GF475@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
 <CAJs_Fx4h6SWGmDTLBnV4nmWUFAs_Ge1inxd-dW9aDKgKqmc1eQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJs_Fx4h6SWGmDTLBnV4nmWUFAs_Ge1inxd-dW9aDKgKqmc1eQ@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>, dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com>, Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 07:11:41AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:48 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This goes in the wrong direction.  drm_cflush_* are a bad API we need to
> > > > get rid of, not add use of it.  The reason for that is two-fold:
> > > >
> > > >  a) it doesn't address how cache maintaince actually works in most
> > > >     platforms.  When talking about a cache we three fundamental operations:
> > > >
> > > >         1) write back - this writes the content of the cache back to the
> > > >            backing memory
> > > >         2) invalidate - this remove the content of the cache
> > > >         3) write back + invalidate - do both of the above
> > >
> > > Agreed that drm_cflush_* isn't a great API.  In this particular case
> > > (IIUC), I need wb+inv so that there aren't dirty cache lines that drop
> > > out to memory later, and so that I don't get a cache hit on
> > > uncached/wc mmap'ing.
> >
> > Is there a cacheable alias lying around (e.g. the linear map), or are
> > these addresses only mapped uncached/wc?
> >
> > If there's a cacheable alias, performing an invalidate isn't sufficient,
> > since a CPU can allocate a new (clean) entry at any point in time (e.g.
> > as a result of prefetching or arbitrary speculation).
> 
> I *believe* that there are not alias mappings (that I don't control
> myself) for pages coming from
> shmem_file_setup()/shmem_read_mapping_page()..  

AFAICT, that's regular anonymous memory, so there will be a cacheable
alias in the linear/direct map.

> digging around at what dma_sync_sg_* does under the hood, it looks
> like it is just arch_sync_dma_for_cpu/device(), so I guess that should
> be sufficient for what I need.

I don't think that's the case, per the example I gave above.

Thanks,
Mark.