Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Nilawar, Badal" <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
To: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>, <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: rodrigo.vivi@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/dgfx: Block rpm for active mmap mappings
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2023 12:59:05 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a2a11619-faca-4fb6-b6d1-4aa09a6d8070@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <381b6034-cdbf-4259-ab28-e7858fd750dd@intel.com>



On 07-12-2023 18:36, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 07/12/2023 11:26, Matthew Auld wrote:
>> On 06/12/2023 13:34, Badal Nilawar wrote:
>>> Block rpm for discrete cards when mmap mappings are active.
>>> Ideally rpm wake ref should be taken in vm_open call and put in vm_close
>>> call but it is seen that vm_open doesn't get called for xe_gem_vm_ops.
>>> Therefore rpm wake ref is being get in xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap and put
>>> in vm_close.
>>>
>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>>> index 72dc4a4eed4e..5741948a2a51 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>>>   #include <drm/ttm/ttm_tt.h>
>>>   #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
>>> +#include "i915_drv.h"
>>
>> Do we need this?
>>
>>>   #include "xe_device.h"
>>>   #include "xe_dma_buf.h"
>>>   #include "xe_drm_client.h"
>>> @@ -1158,17 +1159,47 @@ static vm_fault_t xe_gem_fault(struct 
>>> vm_fault *vmf)
>>>       return ret;
>>>   }
>>> +static void xe_ttm_bo_vm_close(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo = vma->vm_private_data;
>>> +    struct drm_device *ddev = tbo->base.dev;
>>> +    struct xe_device *xe = to_xe_device(ddev);
>>> +
>>> +    ttm_bo_vm_close(vma);
>>> +
>>> +    if (tbo->resource->bus.is_iomem)
>>> +        xe_device_mem_access_put(xe);
> 
> Are you sure this works as expected? Say if the user partially unmaps 
> something?
> 
> map = mmap(obj, size);
> unmap(map, size/2);
> unmap(map, size);
> 
> That would be one mmap but multiple vm_close calls leading to an 
> imbalance in the RPM ref. I think we need the access_get in the vm_open 
> also?I haven't tried partial mmap but for single mmap-unmap I observed
equal number of xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap and vm_close call. Will try partial 
mmap.

For mem_access_get in vm_open, initially we were trying the same but 
observed that vm_open never get called.
In fact i915 i915_gem_mman.c we found this comment for vm_open.
         /*
          * When we install vm_ops for mmap we are too late for
          * the vm_ops->open() which increases the ref_count of
          * this obj and then it gets decreased by the vm_ops->close().
          * To balance this increase the obj ref_count here.
          */
Does similar reason applicable for xe vm_open as well?

Regards,
Badal
> 
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   static const struct vm_operations_struct xe_gem_vm_ops = {
>>>       .fault = xe_gem_fault,
>>>       .open = ttm_bo_vm_open,
>>> -    .close = ttm_bo_vm_close,
>>> +    .close = xe_ttm_bo_vm_close,
>>>       .access = ttm_bo_vm_access
>>>   };
>>> +int xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap(struct drm_gem_object *gem,
>>> +            struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo = drm_gem_ttm_of_gem(gem);
>>> +    struct drm_device *ddev = tbo->base.dev;
>>> +    struct xe_device *xe = to_xe_device(ddev);
>>> +    int ret;
>>> +
>>> +    ret = drm_gem_ttm_mmap(gem, vma);
>>> +    if (ret < 0)
>>> +        return ret;
>>> +
>>> +    if (tbo->resource->bus.is_iomem)
>>> +        xe_device_mem_access_get(xe);
>>
>> Checking is_iomem outside of the usual locking is racy. One issue here 
>> is that is_iomem can freely change at any point (like at fault time) 
>> so when vm_close is called you can easily get an an unbalanced RPM ref 
>> count. For example io_mem is false here but later becomes true in 
>> bo_vm_close and then we call mem_access_put even though we never 
>> called mem_access_get.
>>
>> Maybe check the possible placements of the object instead since that 
>> is immutable?
>>
>>> +
>>> +    return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   static const struct drm_gem_object_funcs xe_gem_object_funcs = {
>>>       .free = xe_gem_object_free,
>>>       .close = xe_gem_object_close,
>>> -    .mmap = drm_gem_ttm_mmap,
>>> +    .mmap = xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap,
>>>       .export = xe_gem_prime_export,
>>>       .vm_ops = &xe_gem_vm_ops,
>>>   };

  reply	other threads:[~2023-12-08  7:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-06 13:34 [Intel-xe] [PATCH 0/2] Handle mmap with D3 Badal Nilawar
2023-12-06 13:34 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/dgfx: Block rpm for active mmap mappings Badal Nilawar
2023-12-07 11:26   ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-07 13:06     ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-08  7:29       ` Nilawar, Badal [this message]
2023-12-08  9:11         ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-08  7:17     ` Nilawar, Badal
2023-12-08  9:27       ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-06 13:34 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 2/2] drm/xe/dgfx: Release mmap mappings on rpm suspend Badal Nilawar
2023-12-07 11:37   ` Matthew Auld
2023-12-07 17:00     ` Gupta, Anshuman
2023-12-08 11:15   ` [Intel-xe] " Thomas Hellström
2023-12-06 16:28 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Handle mmap with D3 Patchwork
2023-12-06 16:28 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2023-12-06 16:28 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.KUnit: failure " 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=a2a11619-faca-4fb6-b6d1-4aa09a6d8070@intel.com \
    --to=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@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