From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 08/15] drm/i915/ttm Add a generic TTM memcpy move for page-based iomem
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 15:26:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <93b3d7f4-3a82-e3e6-657e-877eac9aaddd@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0eb87fe5-439d-5077-cf19-015966bc3f5f@linux.intel.com>
Am 18.05.21 um 15:24 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
>
> On 5/18/21 3:08 PM, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 18.05.21 um 14:52 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
>>>
>>> On 5/18/21 2:09 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Am 18.05.21 um 14:04 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/18/21 1:55 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 18.05.21 um 10:26 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
>>>>>>> The internal ttm_bo_util memcpy uses vmap functionality, and
>>>>>>> while it
>>>>>>> probably might be possible to use it for copying in- and out of
>>>>>>> sglist represented io memory, using io_mem_reserve() /
>>>>>>> io_mem_free()
>>>>>>> callbacks, that would cause problems with fault().
>>>>>>> Instead, implement a method mapping page-by-page using kmap_local()
>>>>>>> semantics. As an additional benefit we then avoid the occasional
>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>> TLB flushes of vmap() and consuming vmap space, elimination of a
>>>>>>> critical
>>>>>>> point of failure and with a slight change of semantics we could
>>>>>>> also push
>>>>>>> the memcpy out async for testing and async driver develpment
>>>>>>> purposes.
>>>>>>> Pushing out async can be done since there is no memory
>>>>>>> allocation going on
>>>>>>> that could violate the dma_fence lockdep rules.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For copies from iomem, use the WC prefetching memcpy variant for
>>>>>>> additional speed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that drivers that don't want to use struct io_mapping but
>>>>>>> relies on
>>>>>>> memremap functionality, and that don't want to use scatterlists for
>>>>>>> VRAM may well define specialized (hopefully reusable) iterators
>>>>>>> for their
>>>>>>> particular environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In general yes please since I have that as TODO for TTM for a
>>>>>> very long time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I would prefer to fix the implementation in TTM instead and
>>>>>> give it proper cursor handling.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Amdgpu is also using page based iomem and we are having similar
>>>>>> workarounds in place there as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it makes sense to unify this inside TTM and remove the
>>>>>> old memcpy util function when done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Christian.
>>>>>
>>>>> Christian,
>>>>>
>>>>> I was thinking when we replace the bo.mem with a pointer (and
>>>>> perhaps have a driver callback to allocate the bo->mem,
>>>>> we could perhaps embed a struct ttm_kmap_iter and use it for all
>>>>> mapping in one way or another). That would mean perhaps land this
>>>>> is i915 now and sort out the unification once the struct
>>>>> ttm_resource, struct ttm_buffer_object separation has landed?
>>>>
>>>> That stuff is ready, reviewed and I'm just waiting for some amdgpu
>>>> changes to land in drm-misc-next to push it.
>>>>
>>>> But yes in general an iterator for the resource object sounds like
>>>> the right plan to me as well.
>>>>
>>>> Christian.
>>>
>>> OK, so then are you OK with landing this in i915 for now? That would
>>> also ofc mean the export you NAK'd but strictly for this memcpy use
>>> until we merge it with TTM?
>>
>> Well you can of course prototype that in i915, but I really don't
>> want to export the TT functions upstream.
>
> I understand, I once had the same thoughts trying to avoid that as far
> as possible, so this function was actually then added to the ttm_bo
> interface, (hence the awkward naming) as a helper for drivers
> implementing move(), essentially a very special case of
> ttm_bo_move_accel_cleanup(), but anyway, see below:
>
>>
>> Can we cleanly move that functionality into TTM instead?
>
> I'll take a look at that, but I think we'd initially be having
> iterators mimicing the current move_memcpy() for the
> linear iomem !WC cases, hope that's OK.
Yeah, that's peefectly fine with me. I can tackle cleaning up all
drivers and move over to the new implementation when that is fully complete.
As I said we already have the same problem in amdgpu and only solved it
by avoiding memcpy all together.
Christian.
>
> /Thomas
>
>
>>
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> /Thomas
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-18 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-18 8:26 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 00/15] drm/i915: Move LMEM (VRAM) management over to TTM Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 01/15] drm/i915: Untangle the vma pages_mutex Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 11:12 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-05-18 11:28 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 02/15] drm/i915: Don't free shared locks while shared Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 11:18 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-05-18 11:30 ` Thomas Hellström (Intel)
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 03/15] drm/i915: Fix i915_sg_page_sizes to record dma segments rather than physical pages Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:46 ` Matthew Auld
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 04/15] drm/ttm: Export functions to initialize and finalize the ttm range manager standalone Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 9:03 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-05-18 11:51 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 13:06 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 13:11 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 05/15] drm/i915/ttm Initialize the ttm device and memory managers Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 9:05 ` Matthew Auld
2021-05-18 9:09 ` Matthew Auld
2021-05-18 9:12 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 06/15] drm/i915/ttm: Embed a ttm buffer object in the i915 gem object Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 11:44 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 07/15] drm/ttm: Export ttm_bo_tt_destroy() Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 11:46 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-05-18 12:01 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 08/15] drm/i915/ttm Add a generic TTM memcpy move for page-based iomem Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 11:55 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 12:04 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 12:09 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 12:52 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 13:08 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 13:24 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 13:26 ` Christian König [this message]
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 09/15] drm/ttm, drm/amdgpu: Allow the driver some control over swapping Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 12:19 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-05-18 15:15 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 15:18 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 15:20 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 15:28 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 15:38 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 15:42 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 16:07 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 16:30 ` Christian König
2021-05-19 6:27 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-19 10:43 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 10/15] drm/i915/ttm: Introduce a TTM i915 gem object backend Thomas Hellström
2021-05-19 9:53 ` Matthew Auld
2021-05-19 11:29 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 11/15] drm/i915/lmem: Verify checks for lmem residency Thomas Hellström
2021-05-19 10:04 ` Matthew Auld
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 12/15] drm/i915: Disable mmap ioctl for gen12+ Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:41 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:26 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 13/15] drm/ttm: Add BO and offset arguments for vm_access and vm_fault ttm handlers Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:59 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 11:59 ` Christian König
2021-05-18 14:59 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:27 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 14/15] drm/i915: Use ttm mmap handling for ttm bo's Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 9:17 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:27 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 15/15] drm/i915/ttm: Add io sgt caching to i915_ttm_io_mem_pfn Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 9:33 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-05-18 8:44 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Move LMEM (VRAM) management over to TTM (rev2) Patchwork
2021-05-18 8:47 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-05-18 9:14 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2021-05-18 17:02 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success " Patchwork
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=93b3d7f4-3a82-e3e6-657e-877eac9aaddd@amd.com \
--to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
/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