From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: "Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
Cc: phasta@mailbox.org, matthew.brost@intel.com,
sumit.semwal@linaro.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] dma-buf: protected fence ops by RCU v5
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2026 15:20:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260213152028.52e15600@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260210102232.1642-2-christian.koenig@amd.com>
On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 11:01:56 +0100
"Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> wrote:
> At first glance it is counter intuitive to protect a constant function
> pointer table by RCU, but this allows modules providing the function
> table to unload by waiting for an RCU grace period.
>
> v2: make one the now duplicated lockdep warnings a comment instead.
> v3: Add more documentation to ->wait and ->release callback.
> v4: fix typo in documentation
> v5: rebased on drm-tip
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
> ---
> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> include/linux/dma-fence.h | 29 ++++++++++++++--
> 2 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> index e05beae6e407..de9bf18be3d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> @@ -522,6 +522,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_signal);
> signed long
> dma_fence_wait_timeout(struct dma_fence *fence, bool intr, signed long timeout)
> {
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
> signed long ret;
>
> if (WARN_ON(timeout < 0))
> @@ -533,15 +534,21 @@ dma_fence_wait_timeout(struct dma_fence *fence, bool intr, signed long timeout)
>
> dma_fence_enable_sw_signaling(fence);
>
> - if (trace_dma_fence_wait_start_enabled()) {
> - rcu_read_lock();
> - trace_dma_fence_wait_start(fence);
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> + trace_dma_fence_wait_start(fence);
> + if (ops->wait) {
> + /*
> + * Implementing the wait ops is deprecated and not supported for
> + * issuer independent fences, so it is ok to use the ops outside
> + * the RCU protected section.
> + */
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + ret = ops->wait(fence, intr, timeout);
> + } else {
> rcu_read_unlock();
> - }
> - if (fence->ops->wait)
> - ret = fence->ops->wait(fence, intr, timeout);
> - else
> ret = dma_fence_default_wait(fence, intr, timeout);
> + }
> if (trace_dma_fence_wait_end_enabled()) {
> rcu_read_lock();
> trace_dma_fence_wait_end(fence);
> @@ -562,6 +569,7 @@ void dma_fence_release(struct kref *kref)
> {
> struct dma_fence *fence =
> container_of(kref, struct dma_fence, refcount);
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> trace_dma_fence_destroy(fence);
> @@ -593,12 +601,12 @@ void dma_fence_release(struct kref *kref)
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(fence->lock, flags);
> }
>
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> -
> - if (fence->ops->release)
> - fence->ops->release(fence);
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> + if (ops->release)
> + ops->release(fence);
> else
> dma_fence_free(fence);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_release);
>
> @@ -617,6 +625,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_free);
>
> static bool __dma_fence_enable_signaling(struct dma_fence *fence)
> {
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
> bool was_set;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(fence->lock);
> @@ -627,14 +636,18 @@ static bool __dma_fence_enable_signaling(struct dma_fence *fence)
> if (dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(fence))
> return false;
>
> - if (!was_set && fence->ops->enable_signaling) {
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> + if (!was_set && ops->enable_signaling) {
> trace_dma_fence_enable_signal(fence);
>
> - if (!fence->ops->enable_signaling(fence)) {
> + if (!ops->enable_signaling(fence)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> dma_fence_signal_locked(fence);
> return false;
> }
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return true;
> }
> @@ -1007,8 +1020,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_wait_any_timeout);
> */
> void dma_fence_set_deadline(struct dma_fence *fence, ktime_t deadline)
> {
> - if (fence->ops->set_deadline && !dma_fence_is_signaled(fence))
> - fence->ops->set_deadline(fence, deadline);
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> + if (ops->set_deadline && !dma_fence_is_signaled(fence))
> + ops->set_deadline(fence, deadline);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_set_deadline);
>
> @@ -1049,7 +1067,12 @@ __dma_fence_init(struct dma_fence *fence, const struct dma_fence_ops *ops,
> BUG_ON(!ops || !ops->get_driver_name || !ops->get_timeline_name);
>
> kref_init(&fence->refcount);
> - fence->ops = ops;
> + /*
> + * At first glance it is counter intuitive to protect a constant
> + * function pointer table by RCU, but this allows modules providing the
> + * function table to unload by waiting for an RCU grace period.
> + */
> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(fence->ops, ops);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fence->cb_list);
> fence->lock = lock;
> fence->context = context;
> @@ -1129,11 +1152,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_init64);
> */
> const char __rcu *dma_fence_driver_name(struct dma_fence *fence)
> {
> - RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_read_lock_held(),
> - "RCU protection is required for safe access to returned string");
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
>
> + /* RCU protection is required for safe access to returned string */
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> if (!dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(fence))
> - return (const char __rcu *)fence->ops->get_driver_name(fence);
> + return (const char __rcu *)ops->get_driver_name(fence);
> else
> return (const char __rcu *)"detached-driver";
> }
> @@ -1161,11 +1185,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_driver_name);
> */
> const char __rcu *dma_fence_timeline_name(struct dma_fence *fence)
> {
> - RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_read_lock_held(),
> - "RCU protection is required for safe access to returned string");
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
>
> + /* RCU protection is required for safe access to returned string */
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> if (!dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(fence))
> - return (const char __rcu *)fence->ops->get_driver_name(fence);
> + return (const char __rcu *)ops->get_driver_name(fence);
> else
> return (const char __rcu *)"signaled-timeline";
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-fence.h b/include/linux/dma-fence.h
> index 9c4d25289239..6bf4feb0e01f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-fence.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-fence.h
> @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ struct seq_file;
> */
> struct dma_fence {
> spinlock_t *lock;
> - const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
> + const struct dma_fence_ops __rcu *ops;
> /*
> * We clear the callback list on kref_put so that by the time we
> * release the fence it is unused. No one should be adding to the
> @@ -220,6 +220,10 @@ struct dma_fence_ops {
> * timed out. Can also return other error values on custom implementations,
> * which should be treated as if the fence is signaled. For example a hardware
> * lockup could be reported like that.
> + *
> + * Implementing this callback prevents the fence from detaching after
> + * signaling and so it is mandatory for the module providing the
> + * dma_fence_ops to stay loaded as long as the dma_fence exists.
> */
> signed long (*wait)(struct dma_fence *fence,
> bool intr, signed long timeout);
> @@ -231,6 +235,13 @@ struct dma_fence_ops {
> * Can be called from irq context. This callback is optional. If it is
> * NULL, then dma_fence_free() is instead called as the default
> * implementation.
> + *
> + * Implementing this callback prevents the fence from detaching after
> + * signaling and so it is mandatory for the module providing the
> + * dma_fence_ops to stay loaded as long as the dma_fence exists.
> + *
> + * If the callback is implemented the memory backing the dma_fence
> + * object must be freed RCU safe.
> */
> void (*release)(struct dma_fence *fence);
>
> @@ -454,13 +465,19 @@ dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(struct dma_fence *fence)
> static inline bool
> dma_fence_is_signaled_locked(struct dma_fence *fence)
> {
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
> +
> if (dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(fence))
> return true;
>
> - if (fence->ops->signaled && fence->ops->signaled(fence)) {
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> + if (ops->signaled && ops->signaled(fence)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> dma_fence_signal_locked(fence);
> return true;
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return false;
> }
> @@ -484,13 +501,19 @@ dma_fence_is_signaled_locked(struct dma_fence *fence)
> static inline bool
> dma_fence_is_signaled(struct dma_fence *fence)
> {
> + const struct dma_fence_ops *ops;
> +
> if (dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(fence))
> return true;
>
> - if (fence->ops->signaled && fence->ops->signaled(fence)) {
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + ops = rcu_dereference(fence->ops);
> + if (ops->signaled && ops->signaled(fence)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> dma_fence_signal(fence);
> return true;
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> return false;
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-13 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-10 10:01 Independence for dma_fences! v7 Christian König
2026-02-10 10:01 ` [PATCH 1/8] dma-buf: protected fence ops by RCU v5 Christian König
2026-02-11 10:06 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-11 15:43 ` Christian König
2026-02-12 8:56 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-19 10:23 ` Christian König
2026-02-19 10:35 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-19 12:49 ` Christian König
2026-02-12 9:03 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-12 9:31 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-13 14:20 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2026-02-10 10:01 ` [PATCH 2/8] dma-buf: detach fence ops on signal v2 Christian König
2026-02-13 14:22 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-19 12:52 ` Christian König
2026-02-19 15:49 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-10 10:01 ` [PATCH 3/8] dma-buf: abstract fence locking v2 Christian König
2026-02-12 9:07 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-10 10:01 ` [PATCH 4/8] dma-buf: inline spinlock for fence protection v4 Christian König
2026-02-11 9:50 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-11 14:59 ` Christian König
2026-02-12 9:01 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-12 9:16 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-13 14:27 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-15 8:48 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-16 7:33 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-16 9:48 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-10 10:02 ` [PATCH 5/8] dma-buf/selftests: test RCU ops and inline lock v2 Christian König
2026-02-10 10:02 ` [PATCH 6/8] dma-buf: use inline lock for the stub fence v2 Christian König
2026-02-13 14:32 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-10 10:02 ` [PATCH 7/8] dma-buf: use inline lock for the dma-fence-array Christian König
2026-02-13 14:33 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-02-10 10:02 ` [PATCH 8/8] dma-buf: use inline lock for the dma-fence-chain Christian König
2026-02-13 14:33 ` Boris Brezillon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260213152028.52e15600@fedora \
--to=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=phasta@mailbox.org \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox