From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
leonro@nvidia.com, francois.dugast@intel.com,
thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com,
himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 06/11] drm/pagemap: Add IOVA interface to DRM pagemap
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 14:57:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260129185731.GA2333318@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aXpwecQRovIurYKV@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com>
On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 12:24:25PM -0800, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 03:35:09PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 10:42:53AM -0800, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > Yes, this is exactly what I envision here. First, let me explain the
> > > possible addressing modes on the UAL fabric:
> > >
> > > - Physical (akin to IOMMU passthrough)
> > > - Virtual (akin to IOMMU enabled)
> > >
> > > Physical mode is straightforward — resolve the PFN to a cross-device
> > > physical address, then install it into the initiator’s page tables along
> > > with a bit indicating routing over the network. In this mode, the vfuncs
> > > here are basically NOPs.
> >
> > Ugh of course they would invent something so complicated.
>
> Why wouldn't we... But conceptually really fairly close to IOMMU
> paththrough vs. enabled.
Why do you need address virtualization on the scale up fabric :( I can
see access control but full virtualization sounds like overkill,
especially considering how slow it will necessarily be compared to the
fabric itself.
We are already in a world where even PCI can't manage untranslated
requests and a scale up fabric with 3TB/sec of bandwidth is somehow
going to have address translation too? Doesn't seem reasonable.
> > I'm not convinced this should be hidden inside DRM. The DMA API is the
>
>
> Well, what I’m suggesting isn’t in DRM. A UAL API would be its own
> layer, much like the DMA API. Of course we could stick this in the DMA
> API and make it high-speed-fabric-generic, etc., but I do think the
> fabric functions would have their own signatures and semantics (see my
> explanation around device_ual_alloc reclaim rules, what locks it is
> allowed to take, etc.).
DMA API is already bus agnostic, I think there is no issue to plug in
a ualink_device or whatever under there and make it do something
sensible, and it would be *particularly* easy if the address
translation can slot in as an attached iommu.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-29 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-28 0:48 [RFC PATCH v3 00/11] Use new dma-map IOVA alloc, link, and sync API in GPU SVM and DRM pagemap Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/11] drm/pagemap: Add helper to access zone_device_data Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 13:53 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/11] drm/gpusvm: Use dma-map IOVA alloc, link, and sync API in GPU SVM Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 14:04 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/11] drm/pagemap: Split drm_pagemap_migrate_map_pages into device / system Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/11] drm/pagemap: Use dma-map IOVA alloc, link, and sync API for DRM pagemap Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 14:28 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-01-28 17:46 ` Matthew Brost
[not found] ` <20260128175531.GR1641016@ziepe.ca>
2026-01-28 19:29 ` Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 19:45 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-01-28 21:04 ` Matthew Brost
2026-01-29 10:14 ` Leon Romanovsky
2026-01-29 18:22 ` Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/11] drm/pagemap: Reduce number of IOVA link calls Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/11] drm/pagemap: Add IOVA interface to DRM pagemap Matthew Brost
[not found] ` <20260128151458.GJ1641016@ziepe.ca>
2026-01-28 18:42 ` Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 19:41 ` Matthew Brost
[not found] ` <20260128193509.GU1641016@ziepe.ca>
2026-01-28 20:24 ` Matthew Brost
2026-01-29 18:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2026-01-29 19:28 ` Matthew Brost
2026-01-29 19:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/11] drm/xe: Stub out DRM pagemap IOVA alloc implementation Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/11] drm/pagemap: Use device-to-device IOVA alloc, link, and sync API for DRM pagemap Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/11] drm/xe: Drop BO dma-resv lock during SVM migrate-to-device Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/11] drm/xe: Implement DRM pagemap IOVA vfuncs Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/11] drm/gpusvm: Use device-to-device IOVA alloc, link, and sync API in GPU SVM Matthew Brost
2026-01-28 0:59 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Use new dma-map IOVA alloc, link, and sync API in GPU SVM and DRM pagemap (rev3) Patchwork
2026-01-28 1:01 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2026-01-28 1:42 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " 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=20260129185731.GA2333318@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=francois.dugast@intel.com \
--cc=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=leonro@nvidia.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--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