linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 06/14] dma-buf/sync

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]
Message-ID: <CAF6AEGvXJkmwn8M6ThCx0bLwDFqqHmjp5fkDuDa7g2e8i3eM_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Feb 2023 09:55:12 -0800
From:   Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
To:     Sebastian Wick <sebastian.wick@...hat.com>
Cc:     Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@...il.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>,
        Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
        Michel Dänzer <michel@...nzer.net>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        "moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        "open list:SYNC FILE FRAMEWORK" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/14] dma-buf/sync_file: Support (E)POLLPRI

On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 8:01 AM Sebastian Wick
<sebastian.wick@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 9:38 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 08:14:47 -0800
> > Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 12:53 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 13:15:49 -0800
> > > > Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > Allow userspace to use the EPOLLPRI/POLLPRI flag to indicate an urgent
> > > > > wait (as opposed to a "housekeeping" wait to know when to cleanup after
> > > > > some work has completed).  Usermode components of GPU driver stacks
> > > > > often poll() on fence fd's to know when it is safe to do things like
> > > > > free or reuse a buffer, but they can also poll() on a fence fd when
> > > > > waiting to read back results from the GPU.  The EPOLLPRI/POLLPRI flag
> > > > > lets the kernel differentiate these two cases.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > where would the UAPI documentation of this go?
> > > > It seems to be missing.
> > >
> > > Good question, I am not sure.  The poll() man page has a description,
> > > but my usage doesn't fit that _exactly_ (but OTOH the description is a
> > > bit vague).
> > >
> > > > If a Wayland compositor is polling application fences to know which
> > > > client buffer to use in its rendering, should the compositor poll with
> > > > PRI or not? If a compositor polls with PRI, then all fences from all
> > > > applications would always be PRI. Would that be harmful somehow or
> > > > would it be beneficial?
> > >
> > > I think a compositor would rather use the deadline ioctl and then poll
> > > without PRI.  Otherwise you are giving an urgency signal to the fence
> > > signaller which might not necessarily be needed.
> > >
> > > The places where I expect PRI to be useful is more in mesa (things
> > > like glFinish(), readpix, and other similar sorts of blocking APIs)
> >
> > Sounds good. Docs... ;-)
> >
> > Hmm, so a compositor should set the deadline when it processes the
> > wl_surface.commit, and not when it actually starts repainting, to give
> > time for the driver to react and the GPU to do some more work. The
> > deadline would be the time when the compositor starts its repaint, so
> > it knows if the buffer is ready or not.
>
> Technically we don't know when the commit is supposed to be shown.
> Just passing a deadline of the next possible deadline however is
> probably a good enough guess for this feature to be useful.
>
> One thing that neither API allows us to do is tell the kernel in
> advance when we're going to submit work and what the deadline for it
> is and unfortunately that work is the most timing sensitive.

Presumably you are talking about the final compositing step?
Elsewhere in this series that atomic wait-for-fences step sets the
deadline hint.

BR,
-R

> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > pq
> >
> >
> > >
> > > BR,
> > > -R
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > pq
> > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c | 8 ++++++++
> > > > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c b/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
> > > > > index fb6ca1032885..c30b2085ee0a 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
> > > > > @@ -192,6 +192,14 @@ static __poll_t sync_file_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> > > > >  {
> > > > >       struct sync_file *sync_file = file->private_data;
> > > > >
> > > > > +     /*
> > > > > +      * The POLLPRI/EPOLLPRI flag can be used to signal that
> > > > > +      * userspace wants the fence to signal ASAP, express this
> > > > > +      * as an immediate deadline.
> > > > > +      */
> > > > > +     if (poll_requested_events(wait) & EPOLLPRI)
> > > > > +             dma_fence_set_deadline(sync_file->fence, ktime_get());
> > > > > +
> > > > >       poll_wait(file, &sync_file->wq, wait);
> > > > >
> > > > >       if (list_empty(&sync_file->cb.node) &&
> > > >
> >
>