[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210622153422.GR1096940@ziepe.ca>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 12:34:22 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>
Cc: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>, sleybo@...zon.com,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@...nel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
"moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
<linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Tomer Tayar <ttayar@...ana.ai>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
"open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH v3 1/2] habanalabs: define uAPI to export
FD for DMA-BUF
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 06:24:28PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 6:11 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:12:26PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> >
> > > > 1) Setting sg_page to NULL
> > > > 2) 'mapping' pages for P2P DMA without going through the iommu
> > > > 3) Allowing P2P DMA without using the p2p dma API to validate that it
> > > > can work at all in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > All of these result in functional bugs in certain system
> > > > configurations.
> > > >
> > > > Jason
> > >
> > > Hi Jason,
> > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > Regarding point 1, why is that a problem if we disable the option to
> > > mmap the dma-buf from user-space ?
> >
> > Userspace has nothing to do with needing struct pages or not
> >
> > Point 1 and 2 mostly go together, you supporting the iommu is not nice
> > if you dont have struct pages.
> >
> > You should study Logan's patches I pointed you at as they are solving
> > exactly this problem.
> Yes, I do need to study them. I agree with you here. It appears I
> have a hole in my understanding. I'm missing the connection between
> iommu support (which I must have of course) and struct pages.
Chistian explained what the AMD driver is doing by calling
dma_map_resource().
Which is a hacky and slow way of achieving what Logan's series is
doing.
> > No, the design of the dmabuf requires the exporter to do the dma maps
> > and so it is only the exporter that is wrong to omit all the iommu and
> > p2p logic.
> >
> > RDMA is OK today only because nobody has implemented dma buf support
> > in rxe/si - mainly because the only implementations of exporters don't
>
> Can you please educate me, what is rxe/si ?
Sorry, rxe/siw - these are the all-software implementations of RDMA
and they require the struct page to do a SW memory copy. They can't
implement dmabuf without it.
> ok...
> so how come that patch-set was merged into 5.12 if it's buggy ?
We only implemented true dma devices for RDMA DMABUF support, so it is
isn't buggy right now.
> Yes, that's what I expect to see. But I want to see it with my own
> eyes and then figure out how to solve this.
It might be tricky to test because you have to ensure the iommu is
turned on and has a non-idenity page table. Basically if it doesn't
trigger a IOMMU failure then the IOMMU isn't setup properly.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists