[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <015b25e6-cfe1-4110-963f-5f8dc4720d1b@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 11:41:48 +0100
From: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>,
Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>,
Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@...omium.org>, Chia-I Wu
<olvaffe@...il.com>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>,
Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>, Alex Williamson <alex@...zbot.org>,
Ankit Agrawal <ankita@...dia.com>,
Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@...el.com>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] vfio: Wait for dma-buf invalidation to complete
On 1/20/26 21:44, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 04:07:06PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
>>
>> dma-buf invalidation is performed asynchronously by hardware, so VFIO must
>> wait until all affected objects have been fully invalidated.
>>
>> Fixes: 5d74781ebc86 ("vfio/pci: Add dma-buf export support for MMIO regions")
>> Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c
>> index d4d0f7d08c53..33bc6a1909dd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c
>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_dmabuf.c
>> @@ -321,6 +321,9 @@ void vfio_pci_dma_buf_move(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev, bool revoked)
>> dma_resv_lock(priv->dmabuf->resv, NULL);
>> priv->revoked = revoked;
>> dma_buf_move_notify(priv->dmabuf);
>> + dma_resv_wait_timeout(priv->dmabuf->resv,
>> + DMA_RESV_USAGE_KERNEL, false,
>> + MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
>
> Should we explicitly call out in the dma_buf_move_notify() /
> invalidate_mappings kernel-doc that KERNEL slots are the mechanism
> for communicating asynchronous dma_buf_move_notify /
> invalidate_mappings events via fences?
Oh, I missed that! And no that is not correct.
This should be DMA_RESV_USAGE_BOOKKEEP so that we wait for everything.
Regards,
Christian.
>
> Yes, this is probably implied, but it wouldn’t hurt to state this
> explicitly as part of the cross-driver contract.
>
> Here is what we have now:
>
> * - Dynamic importers should set fences for any access that they can't
> * disable immediately from their &dma_buf_attach_ops.invalidate_mappings
> * callback.
>
> Matt
>
>> dma_resv_unlock(priv->dmabuf->resv);
>> }
>> fput(priv->dmabuf->file);
>> @@ -342,6 +345,8 @@ void vfio_pci_dma_buf_cleanup(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev)
>> priv->vdev = NULL;
>> priv->revoked = true;
>> dma_buf_move_notify(priv->dmabuf);
>> + dma_resv_wait_timeout(priv->dmabuf->resv, DMA_RESV_USAGE_KERNEL,
>> + false, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
>> dma_resv_unlock(priv->dmabuf->resv);
>> vfio_device_put_registration(&vdev->vdev);
>> fput(priv->dmabuf->file);
>>
>> --
>> 2.52.0
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists