[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF6AEGujx1oN-xoSduSxmZxWv-GmTyw2JCS3kpXSSGLDUgPM6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:20:26 -0500
From: Rob Clark <rob.clark@...aro.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
Rebecca Schultz Zavin <rebecca@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-buf: mmap support
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 April 2012, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> + Because existing importing subsystems might presume coherent mappings for
>> + userspace, the exporter needs to set up a coherent mapping. If that's not
>> + possible, it needs to fake coherency by manually shooting down ptes when
>> + leaving the cpu domain and flushing caches at fault time. Note that all the
>> + dma_buf files share the same anon inode, hence the exporter needs to replace
>> + the dma_buf file stored in vma->vm_file with it's own if pte shootdown is
>> + requred. This is because the kernel uses the underlying inode's address_space
>> + for vma tracking (and hence pte tracking at shootdown time with
>> + unmap_mapping_range).
>> +
>> + If the above shootdown dance turns out to be too expensive in certain
>> + scenarios, we can extend dma-buf with a more explicit cache tracking scheme
>> + for userspace mappings. But the current assumption is that using mmap is
>> + always a slower path, so some inefficiencies should be acceptable.
>> +
>> + Exporters that shoot down mappings (for any reasons) shall not do any
>> + synchronization at fault time with outstanding device operations.
>> + Synchronization is an orthogonal issue to sharing the backing storage of a
>> + buffer and hence should not be handled by dma-buf itself. This is explictly
>> + mentioned here because many people seem to want something like this, but if
>> + different exporters handle this differently, buffer sharing can fail in
>> + interesting ways depending upong the exporter (if userspace starts depending
>> + upon this implicit synchronization).
>
> How do you ensure that no device can do DMA on the buffer while it's mapped
> into user space in a noncoherent manner?
you do unmap_mapping_range() before DMA..
if you have userspace accessing buffer simultaneously with DMA then
the results are undefined, as they always have been (even w/ uncached
mappings)
BR,
-R
>
> Arnd
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists