linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] drm patches for 2.6.27-rc1

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:37:41 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	dri-devel@...ts.sf.net
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm patches for 2.6.27-rc1

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> [ The *non-atomic* kmap() functions are fairly high-overhead, in that they 
>   want to keep track of cached mappings and remember page addresses etc. 
>   So those are the ones we don't want to support for non-HIGHMEM setups. 
> 
>   But the atomic kmaps are pretty simple, and really only need some 
>   trivial FIXMAP support. We could easily extend it for x86-64, methinks, 
>   and do it for x86-32 even when we don't do HIGHMEM.
> 
>   Ingo? ]

agreed, and there's certainly no resistance from the x86 architecture 
side to extend our mapping APIs in such directions.

But i think the direction of the new GEM code is subtly wrong here, 
because it tries to manage memory even on 64-bit systems. IMO it should 
just map the _whole_ graphics aperture (non-cached) and be done with it. 
There's no faster method at managing pages than the CPU doing a TLB fill 
from pagetables.

The only real API need i see is on 32-bit: with a 1GB or 2GB graphics 
aperture we just cannot map that permanently, so kmap_atomic() is a 
necessity. We can certainly extend that to non-highmem as well.

But this should be an ad-hoc transitionary thing for 32-bit, and on 
64-bit we really should not be using any form of kmap.

Especially with large vertex buffers or textures, mapping a lot of pages 
via kmap is not going to be trivial overhead - even if INVLPG is faster 
than a full TLB flush, it's still on the order of 100-200 cycles - and 
with a lot of pages that mounts up quickly. And if i understood your 
workload correctly you want to do tens of thousand of map/unmap/remap 
events per frame generated - depending on the type of the 3D app/engine.

Or am i missing something subtle? Why do you want the overhead of kmap 
on 64-bit?

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/