Date:   Wed, 3 Oct 2018 19:10:53 +0900
From:   Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Cc:     Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...omium.org>,
        Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@...tlin.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Pawel Osciak <posciak@...omium.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] media: docs-rst: Document m2m stateless video decoder interface

On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 5:48 PM Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl> wrote:
>
> On 09/11/18 10:40, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> >> I am not sure whether this should be documented, but there are some additional
> >> restrictions w.r.t. reference frames:
> >>
> >> Since decoders need access to the decoded reference frames there are some corner
> >> cases that need to be checked:
> >>
> >> 1) V4L2_MEMORY_USERPTR cannot be used for the capture queue: the driver does not
> >>    know when a malloced but dequeued buffer is freed, so the reference frame
> >>    could suddenly be gone.
> >
> > It it is confirmed that we cannot use USERPTR buffers as CAPTURE then
> > this probably needs to be documented. I wonder if there isn't a way to
> > avoid this by having vb2 keep a reference to the pages in such a way
> > that they would not be recycled after after userspace calls free() on
> > the buffer. Is that possible with user-allocated memory?
>
> vb2 keeps a reference while the buffer is queued, but that reference is
> released once the buffer is dequeued. Correctly, IMHO. If you provide
> USERPTR, than userspace is responsible for the memory. Changing this
> would require changing the API, since USERPTR has always worked like
> this.

That would be a userspace bug wouldn't it? The next try to get user
pages would fail in that case and we could just fail such decode
request, couldn't we?

(Personally I'm not a big fan of USERPTR, though.)

>
> >
> > Not that I think that forbidding USERPTR buffers in this scenario
> > would be a big problem.
>
> I think it is perfectly OK to forbid this. Ideally I would like to have
> some test in v4l2-compliance or (even better) v4l2-mem2mem.c for this,
> but it is actually not that easy to identify drivers like this.
>
> Suggestions for this on a postcard...
>
> >
> >>
> >> 2) V4L2_MEMORY_DMABUF can be used, but drivers should check that the dma buffer is
> >>    still available AND increase the dmabuf refcount while it is used by the HW.
> >
> > Yeah, with DMABUF the above problem can easily be avoided at least.
> >
> >>
> >> 3) What to do if userspace has requeued a buffer containing a reference frame,
> >>    and you want to decode a B/P-frame that refers to that buffer? We need to
> >>    check against that: I think that when you queue a capture buffer whose index
> >>    is used in a pending request as a reference frame, than that should fail with
> >>    an error. And trying to queue a request referring to a buffer that has been
> >>    requeued should also fail.
> >>
> >> We might need to add some support for this in v4l2-mem2mem.c or vb2.
> >
> > Sounds good, and we should document this as well.
> >
>
> Right. And test it!

I'm not convinced that we should be enforcing this. Moreover,
requeuing a buffer containing a reference frame for a pending request
is not bound to be an error. It might be a legit case when the same
entry in the reference list is replaced with a different key frame
decoded into the same buffer as the reference list entry pointed until
now.

Best regards,
Tomasz

Powered by blists - more mailing lists