linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/etnaviv: Create an accel device node if compute-only

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: <CAPj87rO7zyDsqUWnkF0pZeNFnNK2UnAVJy4RmB3jmPkKQ+zbEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 12:19:40 +0100
From: Daniel Stone <daniel@...ishbar.org>
To: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu@...euvizoso.net>
Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@...nel.org>, Russell King <linux+etnaviv@...linux.org.uk>, 
	Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@...il.com>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, 
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, etnaviv@...ts.freedesktop.org, 
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Daniel Stone <daniels@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/etnaviv: Create an accel device node if compute-only

Hi,

On Mon, 20 May 2024 at 08:39, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu@...euvizoso.net> wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 10:34 AM Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronixde> wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, dem 24.04.2024 um 08:37 +0200 schrieb Tomeu Vizoso:
> > > If we expose a render node for NPUs without rendering capabilities, the
> > > userspace stack will offer it to compositors and applications for
> > > rendering, which of course won't work.
> > >
> > > Userspace is probably right in not questioning whether a render node
> > > might not be capable of supporting rendering, so change it in the kernel
> > > instead by exposing a /dev/accel node.
> > >
> > > Before we bring the device up we don't know whether it is capable of
> > > rendering or not (depends on the features of its blocks), so first try
> > > to probe a rendering node, and if we find out that there is no rendering
> > > hardware, abort and retry with an accel node.
> >
> > On the other hand we already have precedence of compute only DRM
> > devices exposing a render node: there are AMD GPUs that don't expose a
> > graphics queue and are thus not able to actually render graphics. Mesa
> > already handles this in part via the PIPE_CAP_GRAPHICS and I think we
> > should simply extend this to not offer a EGL display on screens without
> > that capability.
>
> The problem with this is that the compositors I know don't loop over
> /dev/dri files, trying to create EGL screens and moving to the next
> one until they find one that works.
>
> They take the first render node (unless a specific one has been
> configured), and assumes it will be able to render with it.
>
> To me it seems as if userspace expects that /dev/dri/renderD* devices
> can be used for rendering and by breaking this assumption we would be
> breaking existing software.

Mm, it's sort of backwards from that. Compositors just take a
non-render DRM node for KMS, then ask GBM+EGL to instantiate a GPU
which can work with that. When run in headless mode, we don't take
render nodes directly, but instead just create an EGLDisplay or
VkPhysicalDevice and work backwards to a render node, rather than
selecting a render node and going from there.

So from that PoV I don't think it's really that harmful. The only
complication is in Mesa, where it would see an etnaviv/amdgpu/...
render node and potentially try to use it as a device. As long as Mesa
can correctly skip, there should be no userspace API implications.

That being said, I'm not entirely sure what the _benefit_ would be of
exposing a render node for a device which can't be used by any
'traditional' DRM consumers, i.e. GL/Vulkan/winsys.

Cheers,
Daniel