[PATCH 1/3] udmabuf: Keep track current device mappings

[PATCH 1/3] udmabuf: Keep track current device mappings

[Andrew Davis]

When a device attaches to and maps our buffer we need to keep track
of this mapping/device. This is needed for synchronization with these
devices when beginning and ending CPU access for instance. Add a list
that tracks device mappings as part of {map,unmap}_udmabuf().

Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
---
 drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
index c406459996489..3a23f0a7d112a 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
@@ -28,6 +28,14 @@ struct udmabuf {
 	struct page **pages;
 	struct sg_table *sg;
 	struct miscdevice *device;
+	struct list_head attachments;
+	struct mutex lock;
+};
+
+struct udmabuf_attachment {
+	struct device *dev;
+	struct sg_table *table;
+	struct list_head list;
 };
 
 static vm_fault_t udmabuf_vm_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
@@ -120,14 +128,42 @@ static void put_sg_table(struct device *dev, struct sg_table *sg,
 static struct sg_table *map_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
 				    enum dma_data_direction direction)
 {
-	return get_sg_table(at->dev, at->dmabuf, direction);
+	struct udmabuf *ubuf = at->dmabuf->priv;
+	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
+
+	a = kzalloc(sizeof(*a), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!a)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+	a->table = get_sg_table(at->dev, at->dmabuf, direction);
+	if (IS_ERR(a->table)) {
+		kfree(a);
+		return a->table;
+	}
+
+	a->dev = at->dev;
+
+	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
+	list_add(&a->list, &ubuf->attachments);
+	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
+
+	return a->table;
 }
 
 static void unmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
 			  struct sg_table *sg,
 			  enum dma_data_direction direction)
 {
-	return put_sg_table(at->dev, sg, direction);
+	struct udmabuf_attachment *a = at->priv;
+	struct udmabuf *ubuf = at->dmabuf->priv;
+
+	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
+	list_del(&a->list);
+	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
+
+	put_sg_table(at->dev, sg, direction);
+
+	kfree(a);
 }
 
 static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
@@ -263,6 +299,9 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice *device,
 		memfd = NULL;
 	}
 
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->attachments);
+	mutex_init(&ubuf->lock);
+
 	exp_info.ops  = &udmabuf_ops;
 	exp_info.size = ubuf->pagecount << PAGE_SHIFT;
 	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
-- 
2.39.2

[PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Andrew Davis]

Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].

That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
itself and can access its own memory space..

Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.

[0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
[1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf device (v2)")

Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
---
 drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
@@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
 struct udmabuf {
 	pgoff_t pagecount;
 	struct page **pages;
-	struct sg_table *sg;
-	struct miscdevice *device;
 	struct list_head attachments;
 	struct mutex lock;
 };
@@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
 static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
 {
 	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
-	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
 	pgoff_t pg;
 
-	if (ubuf->sg)
-		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
-
 	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
 		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
 	kfree(ubuf->pages);
@@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
 			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
 {
 	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
-	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
-	int ret = 0;
-
-	if (!ubuf->sg) {
-		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
-		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
-			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
-			ubuf->sg = NULL;
-		}
-	} else {
-		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
-				    direction);
-	}
+	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
 
-	return ret;
+	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
+
+	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
+		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
+
+	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
+
+	return 0;
 }
 
 static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
 			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
 {
 	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
-	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
+	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
 
-	if (!ubuf->sg)
-		return -EINVAL;
+	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
+
+	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
+		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
+
+	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
 
-	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents, direction);
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice *device,
 	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
 	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
 
-	ubuf->device = device;
 	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
 	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
 		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
-- 
2.39.2

RE: [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Kasireddy, Vivek]

Hi Andrew,

> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
> 
> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
> itself and can access its own memory space..
> 
> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
Makes sense.

> 
> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf
> device (v2)")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a
> dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
>  struct udmabuf {
>  	pgoff_t pagecount;
>  	struct page **pages;
> -	struct sg_table *sg;
> -	struct miscdevice *device;
>  	struct list_head attachments;
>  	struct mutex lock;
>  };
> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct
> dma_buf_attachment *at,
>  static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>  {
>  	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>  	pgoff_t pg;
> 
> -	if (ubuf->sg)
> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
What happens if the last importer maps the dmabuf but erroneously
closes it immediately? Would unmap somehow get called in this case?

Thanks,
Vivek

> -
>  	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
>  		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
>  	kfree(ubuf->pages);
> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf
> *buf,
>  			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
>  {
>  	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> -	int ret = 0;
> -
> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
> -		}
> -	} else {
> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> -				    direction);
> -	}
> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> 
> -	return ret;
> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
> 
>  static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>  			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
>  {
>  	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> 
> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> 
> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> direction);
>  	return 0;
>  }
> 
> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
> *device,
>  	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>  	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
> 
> -	ubuf->device = device;
>  	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
>  	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
>  		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
> --
> 2.39.2

Re: [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Andrew Davis]

On 1/24/24 5:05 PM, Kasireddy, Vivek wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
>> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
>> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
>> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
>> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
>> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
>> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
>> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
>> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
>>
>> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
>> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
>> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
>> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
>> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
>> itself and can access its own memory space..
>>
>> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
>> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
> Makes sense.
> 
>>
>> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
>> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf
>> device (v2)")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a
>> dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
>>   struct udmabuf {
>>   	pgoff_t pagecount;
>>   	struct page **pages;
>> -	struct sg_table *sg;
>> -	struct miscdevice *device;
>>   	struct list_head attachments;
>>   	struct mutex lock;
>>   };
>> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct
>> dma_buf_attachment *at,
>>   static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>>   {
>>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>   	pgoff_t pg;
>>
>> -	if (ubuf->sg)
>> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> What happens if the last importer maps the dmabuf but erroneously
> closes it immediately? Would unmap somehow get called in this case?
> 

Good question, had to scan the framework code a bit here. I thought
closing a DMABUF handle would automatically unwind any current
attachments/mappings, but it seems nothing in the framework does that.

Looks like that is up to the importing drivers[0]:

> Once a driver is done with a shared buffer it needs to call
> dma_buf_detach() (after cleaning up any mappings) and then
> release the reference acquired with dma_buf_get() by
> calling dma_buf_put().

So closing a DMABUF after mapping without first unmapping it would
be a bug in the importer, it is not the exporters problem to check
for (although some more warnings in the framework checking for that
might not be a bad idea..).

Andrew

[0] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.7/driver-api/dma-buf.html

> Thanks,
> Vivek
> 
>> -
>>   	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
>>   		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
>>   	kfree(ubuf->pages);
>> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf
>> *buf,
>>   			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>   {
>>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>> -	int ret = 0;
>> -
>> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
>> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
>> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
>> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
>> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
>> -		}
>> -	} else {
>> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
>> -				    direction);
>> -	}
>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>
>> -	return ret;
>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>>   }
>>
>>   static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>>   			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>   {
>>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>
>> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
>> -		return -EINVAL;
>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>>
>> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
>> direction);
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
>>
>> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
>> *device,
>>   	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>>   	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
>>
>> -	ubuf->device = device;
>>   	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
>>   	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
>>   		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
>> --
>> 2.39.2
> 

RE: [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Kasireddy, Vivek]

> >> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
> >> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
> >> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
> >> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
> >> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
> >> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
> >> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
> >> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
> >>
> >> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
> >> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
> >> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
> >> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
> >> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
> >> itself and can access its own memory space..
> >>
> >> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
> >> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
> > Makes sense.
> >
> >>
> >> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
> >> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf
> >> device (v2)")
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
> >>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> >> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> >> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a
> >> dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
> >>   struct udmabuf {
> >>   	pgoff_t pagecount;
> >>   	struct page **pages;
> >> -	struct sg_table *sg;
> >> -	struct miscdevice *device;
> >>   	struct list_head attachments;
> >>   	struct mutex lock;
> >>   };
> >> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct
> >> dma_buf_attachment *at,
> >>   static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> >> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> >>   	pgoff_t pg;
> >>
> >> -	if (ubuf->sg)
> >> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> > What happens if the last importer maps the dmabuf but erroneously
> > closes it immediately? Would unmap somehow get called in this case?
> >
> 
> Good question, had to scan the framework code a bit here. I thought
> closing a DMABUF handle would automatically unwind any current
> attachments/mappings, but it seems nothing in the framework does that.
> 
> Looks like that is up to the importing drivers[0]:
> 
> > Once a driver is done with a shared buffer it needs to call
> > dma_buf_detach() (after cleaning up any mappings) and then
> > release the reference acquired with dma_buf_get() by
> > calling dma_buf_put().
> 
> So closing a DMABUF after mapping without first unmapping it would
> be a bug in the importer, it is not the exporters problem to check
It may be a bug in the importer but wouldn't the memory associated
with the sg table and attachment get leaked if unmap doesn't get called
in this scenario?

Thanks,
Vivek

> for (although some more warnings in the framework checking for that
> might not be a bad idea..).
> 
> Andrew
> 
> [0] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.7/driver-api/dma-buf.html
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Vivek
> >
> >> -
> >>   	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
> >>   		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
> >>   	kfree(ubuf->pages);
> >> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf
> >> *buf,
> >>   			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> >> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> >> -	int ret = 0;
> >> -
> >> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
> >> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
> >> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
> >> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
> >> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
> >> -		}
> >> -	} else {
> >> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> >> -				    direction);
> >> -	}
> >> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> >>
> >> -	return ret;
> >> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> >> +
> >> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> >> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> >> +
> >> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> >> +
> >> +	return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >>   static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
> >>   			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
> >>   {
> >>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> >> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> >> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> >>
> >> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
> >> -		return -EINVAL;
> >> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> >> +
> >> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> >> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> >> +
> >> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> >>
> >> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> >> direction);
> >>   	return 0;
> >>   }
> >>
> >> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
> >> *device,
> >>   	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
> >>   	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
> >>
> >> -	ubuf->device = device;
> >>   	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
> >>   	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
> >>   		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
> >> --
> >> 2.39.2
> >

Re: [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Andrew Davis]

On 1/26/24 1:25 AM, Kasireddy, Vivek wrote:
>>>> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
>>>> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
>>>> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
>>>> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
>>>> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
>>>> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
>>>> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
>>>> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
>>>>
>>>> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
>>>> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
>>>> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
>>>> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
>>>> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
>>>> itself and can access its own memory space..
>>>>
>>>> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
>>>> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
>>> Makes sense.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
>>>> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf
>>>> device (v2)")
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
>>>>    1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>>>> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>>>> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a
>>>> dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
>>>>    struct udmabuf {
>>>>    	pgoff_t pagecount;
>>>>    	struct page **pages;
>>>> -	struct sg_table *sg;
>>>> -	struct miscdevice *device;
>>>>    	struct list_head attachments;
>>>>    	struct mutex lock;
>>>>    };
>>>> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct
>>>> dma_buf_attachment *at,
>>>>    static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>>>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>>>    	pgoff_t pg;
>>>>
>>>> -	if (ubuf->sg)
>>>> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
>>> What happens if the last importer maps the dmabuf but erroneously
>>> closes it immediately? Would unmap somehow get called in this case?
>>>
>>
>> Good question, had to scan the framework code a bit here. I thought
>> closing a DMABUF handle would automatically unwind any current
>> attachments/mappings, but it seems nothing in the framework does that.
>>
>> Looks like that is up to the importing drivers[0]:
>>
>>> Once a driver is done with a shared buffer it needs to call
>>> dma_buf_detach() (after cleaning up any mappings) and then
>>> release the reference acquired with dma_buf_get() by
>>> calling dma_buf_put().
>>
>> So closing a DMABUF after mapping without first unmapping it would
>> be a bug in the importer, it is not the exporters problem to check
> It may be a bug in the importer but wouldn't the memory associated
> with the sg table and attachment get leaked if unmap doesn't get called
> in this scenario?
> 

Yes the attachment data would be leaked if unattach was not called,
but that is true for all DMABUF exporters. The .release() callback
is meant to be the mirror of the export function and it only cleans
up that. Same for attach/unattach, map/unmap, etc.. If these calls
are not balanced then yes they can leak memory.

Since balance is guaranteed by the API, checking the balance should
be done at that level, not in each and every exporter. If your
comment is that we should add those checks into the DMABUF framework
layer then I would agree.

Andrew

> Thanks,
> Vivek
> 
>> for (although some more warnings in the framework checking for that
>> might not be a bad idea..).
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> [0] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.7/driver-api/dma-buf.html
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vivek
>>>
>>>> -
>>>>    	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
>>>>    		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
>>>>    	kfree(ubuf->pages);
>>>> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf
>>>> *buf,
>>>>    			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>>>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>>> -	int ret = 0;
>>>> -
>>>> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
>>>> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
>>>> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
>>>> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
>>>> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
>>>> -		}
>>>> -	} else {
>>>> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
>>>> -				    direction);
>>>> -	}
>>>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>>>
>>>> -	return ret;
>>>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>>>> +
>>>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>>>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>>>> +
>>>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>>>> +
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>>    static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>>>>    			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>>>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>>>
>>>> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
>>>> -		return -EINVAL;
>>>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>>>> +
>>>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>>>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>>>> +
>>>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>>>>
>>>> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
>>>> direction);
>>>>    	return 0;
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
>>>> *device,
>>>>    	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>>>>    	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
>>>>
>>>> -	ubuf->device = device;
>>>>    	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
>>>>    	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
>>>>    		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
>>>> --
>>>> 2.39.2
>>>

RE: [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Kasireddy, Vivek]

Hi Andrew,

> 
> On 1/26/24 1:25 AM, Kasireddy, Vivek wrote:
> >>>> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
> >>>> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
> >>>> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
> >>>> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
> >>>> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
> >>>> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
> >>>> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
> >>>> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
> >>>>
> >>>> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
> >>>> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
> >>>> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
> >>>> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
> >>>> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
> >>>> itself and can access its own memory space..
> >>>>
> >>>> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
> >>>> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
> >>> Makes sense.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
> >>>> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the
> udmabuf
> >>>> device (v2)")
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>    drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
> >>>>    1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> >>>> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> >>>> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size
> of a
> >>>> dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
> >>>>    struct udmabuf {
> >>>>    	pgoff_t pagecount;
> >>>>    	struct page **pages;
> >>>> -	struct sg_table *sg;
> >>>> -	struct miscdevice *device;
> >>>>    	struct list_head attachments;
> >>>>    	struct mutex lock;
> >>>>    };
> >>>> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct
> >>>> dma_buf_attachment *at,
> >>>>    static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
> >>>>    {
> >>>>    	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> >>>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> >>>>    	pgoff_t pg;
> >>>>
> >>>> -	if (ubuf->sg)
> >>>> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> >>> What happens if the last importer maps the dmabuf but erroneously
> >>> closes it immediately? Would unmap somehow get called in this case?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Good question, had to scan the framework code a bit here. I thought
> >> closing a DMABUF handle would automatically unwind any current
> >> attachments/mappings, but it seems nothing in the framework does that.
> >>
> >> Looks like that is up to the importing drivers[0]:
> >>
> >>> Once a driver is done with a shared buffer it needs to call
> >>> dma_buf_detach() (after cleaning up any mappings) and then
> >>> release the reference acquired with dma_buf_get() by
> >>> calling dma_buf_put().
> >>
> >> So closing a DMABUF after mapping without first unmapping it would
> >> be a bug in the importer, it is not the exporters problem to check
> > It may be a bug in the importer but wouldn't the memory associated
> > with the sg table and attachment get leaked if unmap doesn't get called
> > in this scenario?
> >
> 
> Yes the attachment data would be leaked if unattach was not called,
> but that is true for all DMABUF exporters. The .release() callback
> is meant to be the mirror of the export function and it only cleans
> up that. Same for attach/unattach, map/unmap, etc.. If these calls
> are not balanced then yes they can leak memory.
> 
> Since balance is guaranteed by the API, checking the balance should
> be done at that level, not in each and every exporter. If your
> comment is that we should add those checks into the DMABUF framework
> layer then I would agree.
Yeah, to avoid leaking memory, it would be even better if the framework
can call unmap when the importer fails to do so. Not sure if this is easier
said than done. 

Thanks,
Vivek

> 
> Andrew
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Vivek
> >
> >> for (although some more warnings in the framework checking for that
> >> might not be a bad idea..).
> >>
> >> Andrew
> >>
> >> [0] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.7/driver-api/dma-buf.html
> >>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Vivek
> >>>
> >>>> -
> >>>>    	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
> >>>>    		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
> >>>>    	kfree(ubuf->pages);
> >>>> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct
> dma_buf
> >>>> *buf,
> >>>>    			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
> >>>>    {
> >>>>    	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> >>>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> >>>> -	int ret = 0;
> >>>> -
> >>>> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
> >>>> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
> >>>> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
> >>>> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
> >>>> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
> >>>> -		}
> >>>> -	} else {
> >>>> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> >>>> -				    direction);
> >>>> -	}
> >>>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> >>>>
> >>>> -	return ret;
> >>>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> >>>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	return 0;
> >>>>    }
> >>>>
> >>>>    static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
> >>>>    			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
> >>>>    {
> >>>>    	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> >>>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> >>>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> >>>>
> >>>> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
> >>>> -		return -EINVAL;
> >>>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> >>>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> >>>>
> >>>> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> >>>> direction);
> >>>>    	return 0;
> >>>>    }
> >>>>
> >>>> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
> >>>> *device,
> >>>>    	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
> >>>>    	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
> >>>>
> >>>> -	ubuf->device = device;
> >>>>    	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
> >>>>    	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
> >>>>    		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.39.2
> >>>

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Daniel Vetter]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:12:26PM -0600, Andrew Davis wrote:
> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
> 
> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
> itself and can access its own memory space..
> 
> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
> 
> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf device (v2)")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>

So yeah the above hacks are terrible, but I don't think this is better.
What you're doing now is that you're potentially doing the flushing
multiple times, so if you have a lot of importers with life mappings this
is a performance regression.

It's probably time to bite the bullet and teach the dma-api about flushing
for multiple devices. Or some way we can figure out which is the one
device we need to pick which gives us the right amount of flushing.

Cheers, Sima

> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
>  struct udmabuf {
>  	pgoff_t pagecount;
>  	struct page **pages;
> -	struct sg_table *sg;
> -	struct miscdevice *device;
>  	struct list_head attachments;
>  	struct mutex lock;
>  };
> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
>  static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>  {
>  	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>  	pgoff_t pg;
>  
> -	if (ubuf->sg)
> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> -
>  	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
>  		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
>  	kfree(ubuf->pages);
> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>  			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
>  {
>  	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> -	int ret = 0;
> -
> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
> -		}
> -	} else {
> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
> -				    direction);
> -	}
> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>  
> -	return ret;
> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>  			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
>  {
>  	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>  
> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>  
> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents, direction);
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice *device,
>  	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>  	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
>  
> -	ubuf->device = device;
>  	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
>  	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
>  		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list -- linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-mm-sig-leave@lists.linaro.org

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Andrew Davis]

On 1/25/24 2:30 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:12:26PM -0600, Andrew Davis wrote:
>> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
>> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
>> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
>> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
>> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
>> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
>> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
>> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
>>
>> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
>> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
>> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
>> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
>> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
>> itself and can access its own memory space..
>>
>> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
>> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
>>
>> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
>> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf device (v2)")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
> 
> So yeah the above hacks are terrible, but I don't think this is better.
> What you're doing now is that you're potentially doing the flushing
> multiple times, so if you have a lot of importers with life mappings this
> is a performance regression.

I'd take lower performing but correct than fast and broken. :)

Syncing for CPU/device is about making sure the CPU/device can see
the data produced by the other. Some devices might be dma-coherent
and syncing for them would be a NOP, but we cant know that here
in this driver. Let's say we have two attached devices, one that
is cache coherent and one that isn't. If we only sync for first
attached device then that is converted to a NOP and we never flush
like the second device needed.

Same is true for devices behind IOMMU or with an L3 cache when
syncing in the other direction for CPU. So we have to sync for all
attached devices to ensure we get even the lowest common denominator
device sync'd. It is up to the DMA-API layer to decide which syncs
need to actually do something. If all attached devices are coherent
then all syncs will be NOPs and we have no performance penalty.

> 
> It's probably time to bite the bullet and teach the dma-api about flushing
> for multiple devices. Or some way we can figure out which is the one
> device we need to pick which gives us the right amount of flushing.
> 

Seems like a constraint solving micro-optimization. The DMA-API layer
would have to track which buffers have already been flushed from CPU
cache and also track that nothing has been written into those caches
since that point, only then could it skip the flush. But that is already
the point of the dirty bit in the caches themselves, cleaning already
clean cache lines is essentially free in hardware. And so is invalidating
lines, it is just flipping a bit.

Andrew

> Cheers, Sima
> 
>> ---
>>   drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 +++++++++++++++------------------------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
>>   struct udmabuf {
>>   	pgoff_t pagecount;
>>   	struct page **pages;
>> -	struct sg_table *sg;
>> -	struct miscdevice *device;
>>   	struct list_head attachments;
>>   	struct mutex lock;
>>   };
>> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
>>   static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>>   {
>>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>   	pgoff_t pg;
>>   
>> -	if (ubuf->sg)
>> -		put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
>> -
>>   	for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
>>   		put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
>>   	kfree(ubuf->pages);
>> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>>   			     enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>   {
>>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>> -	int ret = 0;
>> -
>> -	if (!ubuf->sg) {
>> -		ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
>> -		if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
>> -			ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
>> -			ubuf->sg = NULL;
>> -		}
>> -	} else {
>> -		dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
>> -				    direction);
>> -	}
>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>   
>> -	return ret;
>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>>   			   enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>   {
>>   	struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>> -	struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>   
>> -	if (!ubuf->sg)
>> -		return -EINVAL;
>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>> +		dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>>   
>> -	dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents, direction);
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
>>   
>> @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice *device,
>>   	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>>   	exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
>>   
>> -	ubuf->device = device;
>>   	buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
>>   	if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
>>   		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
>> -- 
>> 2.39.2
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list -- linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-mm-sig-leave@lists.linaro.org
> 

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 2/3] udmabuf: Sync buffer mappings for attached devices

[Christian König]

Am 26.01.24 um 18:24 schrieb Andrew Davis:
> On 1/25/24 2:30 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:12:26PM -0600, Andrew Davis wrote:
>>> Currently this driver creates a SGT table using the CPU as the
>>> target device, then performs the dma_sync operations against
>>> that SGT. This is backwards to how DMA-BUFs are supposed to behave.
>>> This may have worked for the case where these buffers were given
>>> only back to the same CPU that produced them as in the QEMU case.
>>> And only then because the original author had the dma_sync
>>> operations also backwards, syncing for the "device" on begin_cpu.
>>> This was noticed and "fixed" in this patch[0].
>>>
>>> That then meant we were sync'ing from the CPU to the CPU using
>>> a pseudo-device "miscdevice". Which then caused another issue
>>> due to the miscdevice not having a proper DMA mask (and why should
>>> it, the CPU is not a DMA device). The fix for that was an even
>>> more egregious hack[1] that declares the CPU is coherent with
>>> itself and can access its own memory space..
>>>
>>> Unwind all this and perform the correct action by doing the dma_sync
>>> operations for each device currently attached to the backing buffer.
>>>
>>> [0] commit 1ffe09590121 ("udmabuf: fix dma-buf cpu access")
>>> [1] commit 9e9fa6a9198b ("udmabuf: Set the DMA mask for the udmabuf 
>>> device (v2)")
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
>>
>> So yeah the above hacks are terrible, but I don't think this is better.
>> What you're doing now is that you're potentially doing the flushing
>> multiple times, so if you have a lot of importers with life mappings 
>> this
>> is a performance regression.
>
> I'd take lower performing but correct than fast and broken. :)
>
> Syncing for CPU/device is about making sure the CPU/device can see
> the data produced by the other. Some devices might be dma-coherent
> and syncing for them would be a NOP, but we cant know that here
> in this driver. Let's say we have two attached devices, one that
> is cache coherent and one that isn't. If we only sync for first
> attached device then that is converted to a NOP and we never flush
> like the second device needed.
>
> Same is true for devices behind IOMMU or with an L3 cache when
> syncing in the other direction for CPU. So we have to sync for all
> attached devices to ensure we get even the lowest common denominator
> device sync'd. It is up to the DMA-API layer to decide which syncs
> need to actually do something. If all attached devices are coherent
> then all syncs will be NOPs and we have no performance penalty.
>
>>
>> It's probably time to bite the bullet and teach the dma-api about 
>> flushing
>> for multiple devices. Or some way we can figure out which is the one
>> device we need to pick which gives us the right amount of flushing.
>>
>
> Seems like a constraint solving micro-optimization. The DMA-API layer
> would have to track which buffers have already been flushed from CPU
> cache and also track that nothing has been written into those caches
> since that point, only then could it skip the flush. But that is already
> the point of the dirty bit in the caches themselves, cleaning already
> clean cache lines is essentially free in hardware. And so is invalidating
> lines, it is just flipping a bit.

Well to separate the functionality a bit. What the DMA-API should 
provide is abstracting how the platform does flushing and invalidation 
of caches and the information which devices uses which caches and what 
needs to be flushed/invalidated to allow access between devices and the CPU.

In other words what's necessary is the following:
1. sync device to cpu
2. sync cpu to device
3. sync device to device

1 and 2 are already present and implemented for years, but 3 is missing 
together with some of the necessary infrastructure to actually implement 
this. E.g. we don't know which devices write into which caches etc...

On top of this we need the functionality to track who has accessed which 
piece of data and what DMA-API functions needs to be called to make 
things work for a specific use case. But this is then DMA-buf, I/O layer 
drivers etc.. and should not belong into the DMA-API.

I also strongly think that putting the SWIOTLB bounce buffer 
functionality into the DMA-API was not the right choice.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> Andrew
>
>> Cheers, Sima
>>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 41 
>>> +++++++++++++++------------------------
>>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>>> index 3a23f0a7d112a..ab6764322523c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>>> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(size_limit_mb, "Max size of a 
>>> dmabuf, in megabytes. Default is
>>>   struct udmabuf {
>>>       pgoff_t pagecount;
>>>       struct page **pages;
>>> -    struct sg_table *sg;
>>> -    struct miscdevice *device;
>>>       struct list_head attachments;
>>>       struct mutex lock;
>>>   };
>>> @@ -169,12 +167,8 @@ static void unmap_udmabuf(struct 
>>> dma_buf_attachment *at,
>>>   static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>>>   {
>>>       struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>>> -    struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>>       pgoff_t pg;
>>>   -    if (ubuf->sg)
>>> -        put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
>>> -
>>>       for (pg = 0; pg < ubuf->pagecount; pg++)
>>>           put_page(ubuf->pages[pg]);
>>>       kfree(ubuf->pages);
>>> @@ -185,33 +179,31 @@ static int begin_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>>>                    enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>>   {
>>>       struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>>> -    struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>> -    int ret = 0;
>>> -
>>> -    if (!ubuf->sg) {
>>> -        ubuf->sg = get_sg_table(dev, buf, direction);
>>> -        if (IS_ERR(ubuf->sg)) {
>>> -            ret = PTR_ERR(ubuf->sg);
>>> -            ubuf->sg = NULL;
>>> -        }
>>> -    } else {
>>> -        dma_sync_sg_for_cpu(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents,
>>> -                    direction);
>>> -    }
>>> +    struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>>   -    return ret;
>>> +    mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>>> +
>>> +    list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>>> +        dma_sync_sgtable_for_cpu(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>>> +
>>> +    mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>>> +
>>> +    return 0;
>>>   }
>>>     static int end_cpu_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf,
>>>                  enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>>   {
>>>       struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
>>> -    struct device *dev = ubuf->device->this_device;
>>> +    struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>>>   -    if (!ubuf->sg)
>>> -        return -EINVAL;
>>> +    mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>>> +
>>> +    list_for_each_entry(a, &ubuf->attachments, list)
>>> +        dma_sync_sgtable_for_device(a->dev, a->table, direction);
>>> +
>>> +    mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>>>   -    dma_sync_sg_for_device(dev, ubuf->sg->sgl, ubuf->sg->nents, 
>>> direction);
>>>       return 0;
>>>   }
>>>   @@ -307,7 +299,6 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice 
>>> *device,
>>>       exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>>>       exp_info.flags = O_RDWR;
>>>   -    ubuf->device = device;
>>>       buf = dma_buf_export(&exp_info);
>>>       if (IS_ERR(buf)) {
>>>           ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
>>> -- 
>>> 2.39.2
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list -- linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-mm-sig-leave@lists.linaro.org
>>

[PATCH 3/3] udmabuf: Use module_misc_device() to register this device

[Andrew Davis]

Now that we do not need to call dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent() on our
miscdevice device, use the module_misc_device() helper for registering
and module init/exit.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
---
 drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 30 +-----------------------------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
index ab6764322523c..3028ac3fd9f6a 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
@@ -392,34 +392,6 @@ static struct miscdevice udmabuf_misc = {
 	.name           = "udmabuf",
 	.fops           = &udmabuf_fops,
 };
-
-static int __init udmabuf_dev_init(void)
-{
-	int ret;
-
-	ret = misc_register(&udmabuf_misc);
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		pr_err("Could not initialize udmabuf device\n");
-		return ret;
-	}
-
-	ret = dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(udmabuf_misc.this_device,
-					   DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		pr_err("Could not setup DMA mask for udmabuf device\n");
-		misc_deregister(&udmabuf_misc);
-		return ret;
-	}
-
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static void __exit udmabuf_dev_exit(void)
-{
-	misc_deregister(&udmabuf_misc);
-}
-
-module_init(udmabuf_dev_init)
-module_exit(udmabuf_dev_exit)
+module_misc_device(udmabuf_misc);
 
 MODULE_AUTHOR("Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>");
-- 
2.39.2

RE: [PATCH 3/3] udmabuf: Use module_misc_device() to register this device

[Kasireddy, Vivek]

Acked-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com>

> 
> Now that we do not need to call dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent() on our
> miscdevice device, use the module_misc_device() helper for registering and
> module init/exit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 30 +-----------------------------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 29 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c index
> ab6764322523c..3028ac3fd9f6a 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> @@ -392,34 +392,6 @@ static struct miscdevice udmabuf_misc = {
>  	.name           = "udmabuf",
>  	.fops           = &udmabuf_fops,
>  };
> -
> -static int __init udmabuf_dev_init(void) -{
> -	int ret;
> -
> -	ret = misc_register(&udmabuf_misc);
> -	if (ret < 0) {
> -		pr_err("Could not initialize udmabuf device\n");
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> -
> -	ret = dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent(udmabuf_misc.this_device,
> -					   DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
> -	if (ret < 0) {
> -		pr_err("Could not setup DMA mask for udmabuf device\n");
> -		misc_deregister(&udmabuf_misc);
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> -
> -	return 0;
> -}
> -
> -static void __exit udmabuf_dev_exit(void) -{
> -	misc_deregister(&udmabuf_misc);
> -}
> -
> -module_init(udmabuf_dev_init)
> -module_exit(udmabuf_dev_exit)
> +module_misc_device(udmabuf_misc);
> 
>  MODULE_AUTHOR("Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>");
> --
> 2.39.2

RE: [PATCH 1/3] udmabuf: Keep track current device mappings

[Kasireddy, Vivek]

Hi Andrew,

> When a device attaches to and maps our buffer we need to keep track
> of this mapping/device. This is needed for synchronization with these
> devices when beginning and ending CPU access for instance. Add a list
> that tracks device mappings as part of {map,unmap}_udmabuf().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 43
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> index c406459996489..3a23f0a7d112a 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,14 @@ struct udmabuf {
>  	struct page **pages;
>  	struct sg_table *sg;
>  	struct miscdevice *device;
> +	struct list_head attachments;
> +	struct mutex lock;
> +};
> +
> +struct udmabuf_attachment {
> +	struct device *dev;
> +	struct sg_table *table;
> +	struct list_head list;
>  };
> 
>  static vm_fault_t udmabuf_vm_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> @@ -120,14 +128,42 @@ static void put_sg_table(struct device *dev, struct
> sg_table *sg,
>  static struct sg_table *map_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
>  				    enum dma_data_direction direction)
>  {
> -	return get_sg_table(at->dev, at->dmabuf, direction);
> +	struct udmabuf *ubuf = at->dmabuf->priv;
> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
> +
> +	a = kzalloc(sizeof(*a), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!a)
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> +
> +	a->table = get_sg_table(at->dev, at->dmabuf, direction);
> +	if (IS_ERR(a->table)) {
> +		kfree(a);
> +		return a->table;
Isn't that a use-after-free bug?
Rest of the patch lgtm.

Thanks,
Vivek

> +	}
> +
> +	a->dev = at->dev;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> +	list_add(&a->list, &ubuf->attachments);
> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	return a->table;
>  }
> 
>  static void unmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
>  			  struct sg_table *sg,
>  			  enum dma_data_direction direction)
>  {
> -	return put_sg_table(at->dev, sg, direction);
> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a = at->priv;
> +	struct udmabuf *ubuf = at->dmabuf->priv;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
> +	list_del(&a->list);
> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
> +
> +	put_sg_table(at->dev, sg, direction);
> +
> +	kfree(a);
>  }
> 
>  static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
> @@ -263,6 +299,9 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
> *device,
>  		memfd = NULL;
>  	}
> 
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->attachments);
> +	mutex_init(&ubuf->lock);
> +
>  	exp_info.ops  = &udmabuf_ops;
>  	exp_info.size = ubuf->pagecount << PAGE_SHIFT;
>  	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
> --
> 2.39.2

Re: [PATCH 1/3] udmabuf: Keep track current device mappings

[Andrew Davis]

On 1/24/24 4:36 PM, Kasireddy, Vivek wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
>> When a device attaches to and maps our buffer we need to keep track
>> of this mapping/device. This is needed for synchronization with these
>> devices when beginning and ending CPU access for instance. Add a list
>> that tracks device mappings as part of {map,unmap}_udmabuf().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 43
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> index c406459996489..3a23f0a7d112a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c
>> @@ -28,6 +28,14 @@ struct udmabuf {
>>   	struct page **pages;
>>   	struct sg_table *sg;
>>   	struct miscdevice *device;
>> +	struct list_head attachments;
>> +	struct mutex lock;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct udmabuf_attachment {
>> +	struct device *dev;
>> +	struct sg_table *table;
>> +	struct list_head list;
>>   };
>>
>>   static vm_fault_t udmabuf_vm_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> @@ -120,14 +128,42 @@ static void put_sg_table(struct device *dev, struct
>> sg_table *sg,
>>   static struct sg_table *map_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
>>   				    enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>   {
>> -	return get_sg_table(at->dev, at->dmabuf, direction);
>> +	struct udmabuf *ubuf = at->dmabuf->priv;
>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a;
>> +
>> +	a = kzalloc(sizeof(*a), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!a)
>> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>> +
>> +	a->table = get_sg_table(at->dev, at->dmabuf, direction);
>> +	if (IS_ERR(a->table)) {
>> +		kfree(a);
>> +		return a->table;
> Isn't that a use-after-free bug?

Indeed it is, will fix.

Seems coccicheck also caught this but I missed it when
reviewing its output, my bad :(

Andrew

> Rest of the patch lgtm.
> 
> Thanks,
> Vivek
> 
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	a->dev = at->dev;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +	list_add(&a->list, &ubuf->attachments);
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	return a->table;
>>   }
>>
>>   static void unmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf_attachment *at,
>>   			  struct sg_table *sg,
>>   			  enum dma_data_direction direction)
>>   {
>> -	return put_sg_table(at->dev, sg, direction);
>> +	struct udmabuf_attachment *a = at->priv;
>> +	struct udmabuf *ubuf = at->dmabuf->priv;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +	list_del(&a->list);
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>> +	put_sg_table(at->dev, sg, direction);
>> +
>> +	kfree(a);
>>   }
>>
>>   static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf)
>> @@ -263,6 +299,9 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice
>> *device,
>>   		memfd = NULL;
>>   	}
>>
>> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->attachments);
>> +	mutex_init(&ubuf->lock);
>> +
>>   	exp_info.ops  = &udmabuf_ops;
>>   	exp_info.size = ubuf->pagecount << PAGE_SHIFT;
>>   	exp_info.priv = ubuf;
>> --
>> 2.39.2
>