[PATCH v2 04/10] drm/aperture: Add infrastructure for aperture ownership
Daniel Vetter
daniel at ffwll.ch
Fri Apr 16 08:42:25 UTC 2021
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 09:12:14PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 15.04.21 um 14:57 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 08:56:20AM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Am 09.04.21 um 11:22 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > > > > Is it that easy? simepldrm's detach function has code to
> > > > > synchronize
> with
> > > > > concurrent hotplug removals. If we can use drm_dev_unplug() for everything,
> > > > > I'm all for it.
> > > >
> > > > Uh, I should have looked at the code instead of just asking silly
> > > > questions :-)
> > > >
> > > > Now I'm even more scared, and also more convinced that we're recreating
> > > a
> > > > bad version of some of the core driver model concepts.
> > > >
> > > > I think the ideal option here would be if drm_aperture could unload
> > > > (unbind really) the platform driver for us, through the driver
> > > > model.
> Then
> > > > there's only one place that keeps track whether the driver is
> > > > unbound
> or
> > > > not. I'm not sure whether this can be done fully generic on a struct
> > > > device, or whether we need special code for each type. Since atm we only
> > > > have simpledrm we can just specialize on platform_device and it's good
> > > > enough.
> > >
> > > I meanwhile found that calling platform_device_unregister() is the right
> > > thing to do. It is like a hot-unplug event. It's simple to implement and
> > > removes the generic device as well. Any memory ranges for the generic device
> > > are gone as well. Only the native driver's native device will remain. That's
> > > better than the existing simplefb driver.
> >
> > That sounds great.
> >
> > > Which unregister function to call still driver-specific, so I kept the
> > > callback.
> >
> > Could we have the callback in core code, and you do something like
> > drm_aperture_acquire_platform (and later on drm_aperture_acquire_pci or
> > whatever, although tbh I'm not sure we ever get anything else than
> > platform). That function can do a runtime check that drm_device->dev is
> > actually a platform dev.
>
> Somehow I knew you wouldn't like the current abstraction. :)
>
> >
> > Another idea: Do the runtime casting in the core without anything? Atm we
> > have platform that needs support, maybe pci device, so we could easily
> > extend this and just let it do the right thing. Then no callback is
> > needed. I.e.
> >
> > if (is_platform_dev(drm_device->dev))
> > platform_device_unregister(drm_device->dev);
> > else
> > WARN(1, "not yet implemented\n");
> >
> > or something like that.
>
> I don't like that. I spend time to remove the usb and pci device pointers
> from code and structs. I don't want to introduce a new hard-coded special
> case here.
>
> >
> > I just find the callback to essentially unregister a device a bit
> > redundant.
>
> I'd like to go with your first idea. The callback would be internal and the
> public acquire function is specifically for firmware-based platform devices.
> That covers simple-framebuffer, VESA, EFI, and probably any other generic
> interface that fbdev supported in the last 20+ yrs. I don't think we'll ever
> need anything else.
>
> Still, I'd like to have some abstraction between the internals of the
> aperture helpers and our actual use case. I'll update the patchset
> accordingly.
Makes sense and I'm happy with that pick of color choice. That keeps the
noise out of drivers, and also keeps the concepts clean internally.
-Daniel
>
> Best regards
> Thomas
>
> > -Daniel
> >
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Thomas
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think best here would be to Cc: gregkh on this patch and the simpledrm
> > > > ->detach implementatation, and ask for his feedback as driver model
> > > > maintainer. Maybe if you could hack together the platform_device unbind
> > > > path as proof of concept would be even better.
> > > >
> > > > Either way, this is really tricky.
> > > > -Daniel
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards
> > > > > Thomas
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Or maybe we should tie this more into the struct device mode and force an
> > > > > > unload that way? That way devm cleanup would work as one expects, and
> > > > > > avoid the need for anything specific (hopefully) in this detach callback.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just feels a bit like we're reinventing half of the driver model here,
> > > > > > badly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > + * };
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * static int acquire_framebuffers(struct
> > > > > > > drm_device *dev, struct
> pci_dev *pdev)
> > > > > > > + * {
> > > > > > > + * resource_size_t start, len;
> > > > > > > + * struct drm_aperture *ap;
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * base = pci_resource_start(pdev, 0);
> > > > > > > + * size = pci_resource_len(pdev, 0);
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * ap = devm_acquire_aperture(dev, base, size, &ap_funcs);
> > > > > > > + * if (IS_ERR(ap))
> > > > > > > + * return PTR_ERR(ap);
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * return 0;
> > > > > > > + * }
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * static int probe(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > > > > > > + * {
> > > > > > > + * struct drm_device *dev;
> > > > > > > + * int ret;
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * // ... Initialize the device...
> > > > > > > + * dev = devm_drm_dev_alloc();
> > > > > > > + * ...
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * // ... and acquire ownership of the framebuffer.
> > > > > > > + * ret = acquire_framebuffers(dev, pdev);
> > > > > > > + * if (ret)
> > > > > > > + * return ret;
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * drm_dev_register();
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * return 0;
> > > > > > > + * }
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * The generic driver is now subject to forced removal by other drivers. This
> > > > > > > + * is when the detach function in struct &drm_aperture_funcs comes into play.
> > > > > > > + * When a driver calls drm_fb_helper_remove_conflicting_framebuffers() et al
> > > > > > > + * for the registered framebuffer range, the DRM core calls struct
> > > > > > > + * &drm_aperture_funcs.detach and the generic driver has to onload itself. It
> > > > > > > + * may not access the device's registers, framebuffer memory, ROM, etc after
> > > > > > > + * detach returned. If the driver supports hotplugging, detach can be treated
> > > > > > > + * like an unplug event.
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * .. code-block:: c
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * static void detach_from_device(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > > > > > + * resource_size_t base,
> > > > > > > + * resource_size_t size)
> > > > > > > + * {
> > > > > > > + * // Signal unplug
> > > > > > > + * drm_dev_unplug(dev);
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * // Maybe do other clean-up operations
> > > > > > > + * ...
> > > > > > > + * }
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * static struct drm_aperture_funcs ap_funcs = {
> > > > > > > + * .detach = detach_from_device,
> > > > > > > + * };
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +/**
> > > > > > > + * struct drm_aperture - Represents a DRM framebuffer aperture
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * This structure has no public fields.
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > +struct drm_aperture {
> > > > > > > + struct drm_device *dev;
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t base;
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t size;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + const struct drm_aperture_funcs *funcs;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + struct list_head lh;
> > > > > > > +};
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +static LIST_HEAD(drm_apertures);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +static bool overlap(resource_size_t base1, resource_size_t end1,
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t base2, resource_size_t end2)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > + return (base1 < end2) && (end1 > base2);
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +static void devm_aperture_acquire_release(void *data)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > + struct drm_aperture *ap = data;
> > > > > > > + bool detached = !ap->dev;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + if (!detached)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Uh this needs a comment that if ap->dev is NULL then we're called from
> > > > > > drm_aperture_detach_drivers() and hence the lock is already held.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > + mutex_lock(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and an
> > > > > >
> > > > > > else
> > > > > > locdep_assert_held(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > here to check that. I was scratching my head first quite a bit how you'd
> > > > > > solve the deadlock, this is a neat solution (much simpler than anything I
> > > > > > came up with in my head). But needs comments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + list_del(&ap->lh);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + if (!detached)
> > > > > > > + mutex_unlock(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +/**
> > > > > > > + * devm_aperture_acquire - Acquires ownership of a
> > > > > > > framebuffer on
> behalf of a DRM driver.
> > > > > > > + * @dev: the DRM device to own the framebuffer memory
> > > > > > > + * @base: the framebuffer's byte offset in physical memory
> > > > > > > + * @size: the framebuffer size in bytes
> > > > > > > + * @funcs: callback functions
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * Installs the given device as the new owner. The
> > > > > > > function fails
> if the
> > > > > > > + * framebuffer range, or parts of it, is currently owned by
> > > > > > > another
> > > driver.
> > > > > > > + * To evict current owners, callers should use
> > > > > > > + * drm_fb_helper_remove_conflicting_framebuffers() et al. before calling this
> > > > > > > + * function. Acquired apertures are released
> > > > > > > automatically if the
> underlying
> > > > > > > + * device goes away.
> > > > > > > + *
> > > > > > > + * Returns:
> > > > > > > + * An instance of struct &drm_aperture on success, or a pointer-encoded
> > > > > > > + * errno value otherwise.
> > > > > > > + */
> > > > > > > +struct drm_aperture *
> > > > > > > +devm_aperture_acquire(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t base, resource_size_t size,
> > > > > > > + const struct drm_aperture_funcs *funcs)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > + size_t end = base + size;
> > > > > > > + struct list_head *pos;
> > > > > > > + struct drm_aperture *ap;
> > > > > > > + int ret;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + mutex_lock(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + list_for_each(pos, &drm_apertures) {
> > > > > > > + ap = container_of(pos, struct drm_aperture, lh);
> > > > > > > + if (overlap(base, end, ap->base, ap->base + ap->size))
> > > > > > > + return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + ap = devm_kzalloc(dev->dev, sizeof(*ap), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > > > > + if (!ap)
> > > > > > > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + ap->dev = dev;
> > > > > > > + ap->base = base;
> > > > > > > + ap->size = size;
> > > > > > > + ap->funcs = funcs;
> > > > > > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ap->lh);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + list_add(&ap->lh, &drm_apertures);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + mutex_unlock(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev->dev, devm_aperture_acquire_release, ap);
> > > > > > > + if (ret)
> > > > > > > + return ERR_PTR(ret);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + return ap;
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(devm_aperture_acquire);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +void drm_aperture_detach_drivers(resource_size_t base, resource_size_t size)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t end = base + size;
> > > > > > > + struct list_head *pos, *n;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + mutex_lock(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + list_for_each_safe(pos, n, &drm_apertures) {
> > > > > > > + struct drm_aperture *ap =
> > > > > > > + container_of(pos, struct drm_aperture, lh);
> > > > > > > + struct drm_device *dev = ap->dev;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + if (!overlap(base, end, ap->base, ap->base + ap->size))
> > > > > > > + continue;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + ap->dev = NULL; /* detach from device */
> > > > > > > + if (drm_WARN_ON(dev, !ap->funcs->detach))
> > > > > > > + continue;
> > > > > > > + ap->funcs->detach(dev, ap->base, ap->size);
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + mutex_unlock(&drm_apertures_lock);
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_aperture_detach_drivers);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is this just exported because of the inline functions in the
> > > > > > headers?
> > > Imo
> > > > > > better to make them proper functions (they're big after your patch¬
> > > > > > perf critical, so not good candidates for inlining anyway).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_aperture.h b/include/drm/drm_aperture.h
> > > > > > > index 13766efe9517..696cec75ef78 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/include/drm/drm_aperture.h
> > > > > > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_aperture.h
> > > > > > > @@ -4,8 +4,30 @@
> > > > > > > #define _DRM_APERTURE_H_
> > > > > > > #include <linux/fb.h>
> > > > > > > +#include <linux/pci.h>
> > > > > > > #include <linux/vgaarb.h>
> > > > > > > +struct drm_aperture;
> > > > > > > +struct drm_device;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +struct drm_aperture_funcs {
> > > > > > > + void (*detach)(struct drm_device *dev, resource_size_t base, resource_size_t size);
> > > > > > > +};
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +struct drm_aperture *
> > > > > > > +devm_aperture_acquire(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t base, resource_size_t size,
> > > > > > > + const struct drm_aperture_funcs *funcs);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_DRM_APERTURE)
> > > > > > > +void drm_aperture_detach_drivers(resource_size_t base, resource_size_t size);
> > > > > > > +#else
> > > > > > > +static inline void
> > > > > > > +drm_aperture_detach_drivers(resource_size_t base,
> > > > > > > resource_size_t
> size)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > +#endif
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > /**
> > > > > > > * drm_fb_helper_remove_conflicting_framebuffers - remove firmware-configured framebuffers
> > > > > > > * @a: memory range, users of which are to be removed
> > > > > > > @@ -20,6 +42,11 @@ static inline int
> > > > > > > drm_fb_helper_remove_conflicting_framebuffers(struct apertures_struct *a,
> > > > > > > const char *name, bool primary)
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > + int i;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + for (i = 0; i < a->count; ++i)
> > > > > > > + drm_aperture_detach_drivers(a->ranges[i].base, a->ranges[i].size);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > #if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_FB)
> > > > > > > return remove_conflicting_framebuffers(a, name, primary);
> > > > > > > #else
> > > > > > > @@ -43,7 +70,16 @@ static inline int
> > > > > > > drm_fb_helper_remove_conflicting_pci_framebuffers(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> > > > > > > const char *name)
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > - int ret = 0;
> > > > > > > + resource_size_t base, size;
> > > > > > > + int bar, ret = 0;
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + for (bar = 0; bar < PCI_STD_NUM_BARS; bar++) {
> > > > > > > + if (!(pci_resource_flags(pdev, bar) & IORESOURCE_MEM))
> > > > > > > + continue;
> > > > > > > + base = pci_resource_start(pdev, bar);
> > > > > > > + size = pci_resource_len(pdev, bar);
> > > > > > > + drm_aperture_detach_drivers(base, size);
> > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > /*
> > > > > > > * WARNING: Apparently we must kick fbdev drivers before vgacon,
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > 2.30.1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thomas Zimmermann
> > > > > Graphics Driver Developer
> > > > > SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
> > > > > Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> > > > > (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
> > > > > Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thomas Zimmermann
> > > Graphics Driver Developer
> > > SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
> > > Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> > > (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
> > > Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Thomas Zimmermann
> Graphics Driver Developer
> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
> Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
> Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list