Message-ID: <20141011185502.GH26941@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:	Sat, 11 Oct 2014 20:55:02 +0200
From:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] dma-buf: Add constraints sharing information

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 01:37:55AM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote:
> At present, struct device lacks a mechanism of exposing memory
> access constraints for the device.
> 
> Consequently, there is also no mechanism to share these constraints
> while sharing buffers using dma-buf.
> 
> If we add support for sharing such constraints, we could use that
> to try to collect requirements of different buffer-sharing devices
> to allocate buffers from a pool that satisfies requirements of all
> such devices.
> 
> This is an attempt to add this support; at the moment, only a bitmask
> is added, but if post discussion, we realise we need more information,
> we could always extend the definition of constraint.
> 
> A new dma-buf op is also added, to allow exporters to interpret or decide
> on constraint-masks on their own. A default implementation is provided to
> just AND (&) all the constraint-masks.
> 
> What constitutes a constraint-mask could be left for interpretation on a
> per-platform basis, while defining some common masks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Cc: linux-media@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
> Cc: linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org

Just a few high-level comments, I'm between conference travel but
hopefully I can discuss this a bit at plumbers next week.

- I agree that for the insane specific cases we need something opaque like
  the access constraints mask you propose here. But for the normal case I
  think the existing dma constraints in dma_params would go a long way,
  and I think we should look at Rob's RFC from aeons ago to solve those:

  https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/19/285

  With this we should be able to cover the allocation constraints of 90%
  of all cases hopefully.

- I'm not sure whether an opaque bitmask is good enough really, I suspect
  that we also need various priorities between different allocators. With
  the option that some allocators are flat-out incompatible.

- The big bummer imo with ION is that it fully side-steps, but this
  proposal here also seems to add entirely new allocators. My rough idea
  was that at allocate/attach time we iterate over all attached devices
  like in Rob's patch and compute the most constrained allocation
  requirements. Then we pick the underlying dma api allocator for these
  constraints. That probably means that we need to open up the dma api a
  bit. But I guess for a start we could simply try to allocate from the
  most constrained device. Together with the opaque bits you propose here
  we could even map additional crazy requirements like that an allocation
  must come from a specific memory bank (provided by a special-purpose CMA
  region). That might also mean that requirements are exclusive and no
  allocation is possible.

- I'm not sure we should allow drivers to override the access constraint
  checks really - the dma_buf interfaces already provide this possibility
  through the ->attach callback. In there exporters are allowed to reject
  the attachment for any reason whatsover.

- I think we should at least provide a helper implementation to allocate
  dma-buffers for multiple devices using the dma constraints logic we
  implement here. I think we should even go as far as providing a default
  implementation for dma-bufs which uses dma_alloc_coherent and this new
  dma contstraints computation code internally. This should be good enough
  for almost all devices, except those that do crazy stuff like swap
  support of buffer objects (gem/ttm), virtual hardware buffers (vmwgfx)
  or have other special needs (e.g. non-coherent buffers as speed
  optimization).

Cheers, Daniel

> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  include/linux/device.h    |  7 ++++++-
>  include/linux/dma-buf.h   | 14 +++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
> index f3014c4..33bdb6a 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
> @@ -264,6 +264,30 @@ static inline int is_dma_buf_file(struct file *file)
>  	return file->f_op == &dma_buf_fops;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * def_calc_access_constraints - default implementation of constraint checking
> + */
> +static int def_calc_access_constraints(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
> +		struct dma_buf_attachment *attach)
> +{
> +	unsigned long access_mask;
> +
> +	access_mask = attach->dev->dma_parms->access_constraints_mask;
> +
> +	if (!access_mask) {
> +		pr_warn("%s dev has no access_constraints_mask; using default\n",
> +				dev_name(attach->dev));
> +		 access_mask = DMA_BUF_ALL_MEMORY_ACCESS_MASK;
> +	}
> +
> +	dmabuf->access_constraints_mask &= access_mask;
> +
> +	if (!dmabuf->access_constraints_mask)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * dma_buf_export_named - Creates a new dma_buf, and associates an anon file
>   * with this buffer, so it can be exported.
> @@ -313,6 +337,8 @@ struct dma_buf *dma_buf_export_named(void *priv, const struct dma_buf_ops *ops,
>  	dmabuf->ops = ops;
>  	dmabuf->size = size;
>  	dmabuf->exp_name = exp_name;
> +	dmabuf->access_constraints_mask = DMA_BUF_ALL_MEMORY_ACCESS_MASK;
> +
>  	init_waitqueue_head(&dmabuf->poll);
>  	dmabuf->cb_excl.poll = dmabuf->cb_shared.poll = &dmabuf->poll;
>  	dmabuf->cb_excl.active = dmabuf->cb_shared.active = 0;
> @@ -410,8 +436,10 @@ void dma_buf_put(struct dma_buf *dmabuf)
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_buf_put);
>  
>  /**
> - * dma_buf_attach - Add the device to dma_buf's attachments list; optionally,
> - * calls attach() of dma_buf_ops to allow device-specific attach functionality
> + * dma_buf_attach - Add the device to dma_buf's attachments list;
> + *	calculates access_constraints and throws error if constraints aren't
> + *	satisfied. Optionally, calls attach() of dma_buf_ops to allow
> + *	device-specific attach functionality.
>   * @dmabuf:	[in]	buffer to attach device to.
>   * @dev:	[in]	device to be attached.
>   *
> @@ -436,11 +464,20 @@ struct dma_buf_attachment *dma_buf_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
>  
>  	mutex_lock(&dmabuf->lock);
>  
> +	if (!dmabuf->ops->calc_access_constraints)
> +		ret = def_calc_access_constraints(dmabuf, attach);
> +	else
> +		ret = dmabuf->ops->calc_access_constraints(dmabuf, attach);
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto err_attach;
> +
>  	if (dmabuf->ops->attach) {
>  		ret = dmabuf->ops->attach(dmabuf, dev, attach);
>  		if (ret)
>  			goto err_attach;
>  	}
> +
>  	list_add(&attach->node, &dmabuf->attachments);
>  
>  	mutex_unlock(&dmabuf->lock);
> @@ -785,7 +822,7 @@ static int dma_buf_describe(struct seq_file *s)
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	seq_puts(s, "\nDma-buf Objects:\n");
> -	seq_puts(s, "size\tflags\tmode\tcount\texp_name\n");
> +	seq_puts(s, "size\tflags\tmode\tcount\tconstraints\texp_name\n");
>  
>  	list_for_each_entry(buf_obj, &db_list.head, list_node) {
>  		ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&buf_obj->lock);
> @@ -796,10 +833,11 @@ static int dma_buf_describe(struct seq_file *s)
>  			continue;
>  		}
>  
> -		seq_printf(s, "%08zu\t%08x\t%08x\t%08ld\t%s\n",
> +		seq_printf(s, "%08zu\t%08x\t%08x\t%08ld\t%08lx\t%s\n",
>  				buf_obj->size,
>  				buf_obj->file->f_flags, buf_obj->file->f_mode,
>  				(long)(buf_obj->file->f_count.counter),
> +				buf_obj->access_constraints_mask,
>  				buf_obj->exp_name);
>  
>  		seq_puts(s, "\tAttached Devices:\n");
> @@ -808,7 +846,9 @@ static int dma_buf_describe(struct seq_file *s)
>  		list_for_each_entry(attach_obj, &buf_obj->attachments, node) {
>  			seq_puts(s, "\t");
>  
> -			seq_printf(s, "%s\n", dev_name(attach_obj->dev));
> +			seq_printf(s, "%s\t:%lx\n",
> +					dev_name(attach_obj->dev),
> +			  attach_obj->dev->dma_parms->access_constraints_mask);
>  			attach_count++;
>  		}
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
> index a608e23..f9aefa2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/device.h
> +++ b/include/linux/device.h
> @@ -647,6 +647,11 @@ struct device_dma_parameters {
>  	 */
>  	unsigned int max_segment_size;
>  	unsigned long segment_boundary_mask;
> +	/*
> +	 * access_constraints_mask: this would be used to share constraints
> +	 * about memories that this device can access.
> +	 */
> +	unsigned long access_constraints_mask;
>  };
>  
>  struct acpi_device;
> @@ -696,7 +701,7 @@ struct acpi_dev_node {
>   * 		such descriptors.
>   * @dma_pfn_offset: offset of DMA memory range relatively of RAM
>   * @dma_parms:	A low level driver may set these to teach IOMMU code about
> - * 		segment limitations.
> + *		segment limitations, and access constraints.
>   * @dma_pools:	Dma pools (if dma'ble device).
>   * @dma_mem:	Internal for coherent mem override.
>   * @cma_area:	Contiguous memory area for dma allocations
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-buf.h b/include/linux/dma-buf.h
> index 694e1fe..8429a38 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-buf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-buf.h
> @@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ struct device;
>  struct dma_buf;
>  struct dma_buf_attachment;
>  
> +#define DMA_BUF_ALL_MEMORY_ACCESS_MASK ((unsigned long)-1)
> +
>  /**
>   * struct dma_buf_ops - operations possible on struct dma_buf
>   * @attach: [optional] allows different devices to 'attach' themselves to the
> @@ -44,6 +46,12 @@ struct dma_buf_attachment;
>   *	    is already allocated and incompatible with the requirements
>   *	    of requesting device.
>   * @detach: [optional] detach a given device from this buffer.
> + * @calc_access_constraints(): [optional] will be called at the end of each
> + *		attach - to calculate and set the constraints for this dma_buf
> + *		according to this attachment's access_constraint_mask in
> + *		dev->dma_parms.
> + *		A default implementation is provided, but exporters are free to
> + *		provide	custom version if needed.
>   * @map_dma_buf: returns list of scatter pages allocated, increases usecount
>   *		 of the buffer. Requires atleast one attach to be called
>   *		 before. Returned sg list should already be mapped into
> @@ -77,6 +85,9 @@ struct dma_buf_ops {
>  
>  	void (*detach)(struct dma_buf *, struct dma_buf_attachment *);
>  
> +	int (*calc_access_constraints)(struct dma_buf *,
> +			struct dma_buf_attachment *);
> +
>  	/* For {map,unmap}_dma_buf below, any specific buffer attributes
>  	 * required should get added to device_dma_parameters accessible
>  	 * via dev->dma_params.
> @@ -86,6 +97,7 @@ struct dma_buf_ops {
>  	void (*unmap_dma_buf)(struct dma_buf_attachment *,
>  						struct sg_table *,
>  						enum dma_data_direction);
> +
>  	/* TODO: Add try_map_dma_buf version, to return immed with -EBUSY
>  	 * if the call would block.
>  	 */
> @@ -116,6 +128,7 @@ struct dma_buf_ops {
>   * @ops: dma_buf_ops associated with this buffer object.
>   * @exp_name: name of the exporter; useful for debugging.
>   * @list_node: node for dma_buf accounting and debugging.
> + * @access_constraints_mask: mask to share access constraints.
>   * @priv: exporter specific private data for this buffer object.
>   * @resv: reservation object linked to this dma-buf
>   */
> @@ -130,6 +143,7 @@ struct dma_buf {
>  	void *vmap_ptr;
>  	const char *exp_name;
>  	struct list_head list_node;
> +	unsigned long access_constraints_mask;
>  	void *priv;
>  	struct reservation_object *resv;
>  
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
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