Message-ID: <20200918130955.GV869610@unreal>
Date:   Fri, 18 Sep 2020 16:09:55 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>
Cc:     Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, SW_Drivers <SW_Drivers@...ana.ai>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, izur@...ana.ai,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/14] Adding GAUDI NIC code to habanalabs driver

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:31:51PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 3:19 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 03:07:19PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 3:03 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:56:09PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 2:52 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:36:10PM +0300, Gal Pressman wrote:
> > > > > > > On 17/09/2020 20:18, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 11:46:58PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > > > > > > >> infrastructure for communication between multiple accelerators. Same
> > > > > > > >> as Nvidia uses NVlink, we use RDMA that we have inside our ASIC.
> > > > > > > >> The RDMA implementation we did does NOT support some basic RDMA
> > > > > > > >> IBverbs (such as MR and PD) and therefore, we can't use the rdma-core
> > > > > > > >> library or to connect to the rdma infrastructure in the kernel.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You can't create a parallel RDMA subsystem in netdev, or in misc, and
> > > > > > > > you can't add random device offloads as IOCTL to nedevs.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > RDMA is the proper home for all the networking offloads that don't fit
> > > > > > > > into netdev.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > EFA was able to fit into rdma-core/etc and it isn't even RoCE at
> > > > > > > > all. I'm sure this can too.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, EFA wasn't welcomed to the RDMA subsystem with open arms ;), initially it
> > > > > > > was suggested to go through the vfio subsystem instead.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think this comes back to the discussion we had when EFA was upstreamed, which
> > > > > > > is what's the bar to get accepted to the RDMA subsystem.
> > > > > > > IIRC, what we eventually agreed on is having a userspace rdma-core provider and
> > > > > > > ibv_{ud,rc}_pingpong working (or just supporting one of the IB spec's QP types?).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does GAUDI fit these requirements? If not, should it be in a different subsystem
> > > > > > > or should we open the "what qualifies as an RDMA device" question again?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to remind you that rdma-core requirement came to make sure that
> > > > > > anything exposed from the RDMA to the userspace is strict with proper
> > > > > > UAPI header hygiene.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I doubt that Havana's ioctls are backed by anything like this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > > Why do you doubt that ? Have you looked at our code ?
> > > > > Our uapi and IOCTLs interface is based on drm subsystem uapi interface
> > > > > and it is very safe and protected.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I looked and didn't find open-source users of your UAPI headers.
> > > > It is not related to being safe or protected by to the common request
> > > > to present userspace that relies on those exported interfaces.
> > > >
> > > > > Otherwise Greg would have never allowed me to go upstream in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > Nice, can we get a link?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We have a single function which is the entry point for all the IOCTLs
> > > > > of our drivers (only one IOCTL is RDMA related, all the others are
> > > > > compute related).
> > > > > That function is almost 1:1 copy of the function in drm.
> > > >
> > > > DRM has same rules as RDMA, no kernel code will be merged without seeing
> > > > open-source userspace.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Oded
> > >
> > > So we do have an open-source library called hl-thunk, which uses our
> > > driver and indeed that was part of the requirement.
> > > It is similar to libdrm.
> > > Here is the link:
> > > https://github.com/HabanaAI/hl-thunk
> >
> > Are you kidding?
> >
> > This is mirror of some internal repository that looks like dumpster
> > with ChangeId, internal bug tracker numbers, not part of major OS
> > distributions.
> >
> > It is not open-source library and shows very clear why you chose
> > to upstream your driver through driver/misc/ tree.
> >
> > Thanks
>
> Adding Olof here.
>
> No, usually not.
> But are you kidding ?
> What did you exactly expect to find ? Is there an open-source project
> somewhere that encapsulates Deep-learning accelerators which I could
> connect to ?

I would expect certain level of code quality, collaboration and review
that distros require for inclusion. It is not the case for the github
repo you presented.

> AFAIK, the only thing remotely relevant is CUDA and that is
> closed-source (strange to hear lectures about open-source from NVIDIA
> people here...)

Please check git log statistics to estimate Nvidia/Mellanox/Cumulus
contributions to the Linux kernel and the open-source. You will be
surprised.

>
> So we are trying to give to the community such an open source library,
> or at least an example. Hopefully one day, when more companies
> upstream their drivers for deep-learning accelerators we could do
> something like libdrm or rdma-core, but for now, it's just our driver.

AFAIR, your driver is not unique, HiSilicon tried to submit something
similar years ago (warpdrive) and they are not alone.

>
> I have been in this community since 2013 with AMD and then RedHat, and
> I come with good intentions and a desire to open source and upstream
> as much as I can. I don't think I deserve this kind of response.

There is no need to take it personal. It was you who posted a link
to the github repo. What did you expect?

>
> The bottom line is that we had this discussion with Greg and Olof and
> DRM people almost 2 years ago and if there was some open-source
> project in user-space or some subsystem in the kernel we could connect
> to, we would have done that instead of what we did, but the fact of
> the matter there isn't such thing. Olof tried and is trying to create
> a h/w accelerator subsystem but it still hasn't got up from the ground
> yet.

Maybe it is a time to do it right.

>
> Oded

Powered by blists - more mailing lists