[PATCH 02/10] drm/ttm: flip over the range manager to self allocated nodes
Christian König
ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com
Wed Jun 2 18:53:28 UTC 2021
Am 02.06.21 um 20:52 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>
> On 6/2/21 8:41 PM, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 02.06.21 um 17:28 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On 6/2/21 4:17 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Am 02.06.21 um 16:13 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/2/21 3:07 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 02.06.21 um 14:33 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6/2/21 2:11 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 02.06.21 um 13:44 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 6/2/21 12:09 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Start with the range manager to make the resource object the
>>>>>>>>>> base
>>>>>>>>>> class for the allocated nodes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> While at it cleanup a lot of the code around that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c | 1 +
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c | 2 +
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c | 2 +
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c | 1 +
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c | 1 +
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c | 56
>>>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++-------
>>>>>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_resource.c | 26 ++++++++----
>>>>>>>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h | 26 ------------
>>>>>>>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h | 43
>>>>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_resource.h | 3 ++
>>>>>>>>>> 10 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>>> create mode 100644 include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 69db89261650..df1f185faae9 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/amdgpu_drm.h>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 83e7258c7f90..17a4c5d47b6a 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_prime.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_simple_kms_helper.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> static const struct drm_gem_object_funcs
>>>>>>>>>> drm_gem_vram_object_funcs;
>>>>>>>>>> /**
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 65430912ff72..b08b8efeefba 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@
>>>>>>>>>> #include <linux/limits.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <linux/swiotlb.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>> #include "nouveau_drv.h"
>>>>>>>>>> #include "nouveau_gem.h"
>>>>>>>>>> #include "nouveau_mem.h"
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 8aa87b8edb9c..19fd39d9a00c 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include "qxl_drv.h"
>>>>>>>>>> #include "qxl_object.h"
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> index cdffa9b65108..ad2a5a791bba 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include "radeon_reg.h"
>>>>>>>>>> #include "radeon.h"
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>>>>>>> index b9d5da6e6a81..ce5d07ca384c 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -29,12 +29,13 @@
>>>>>>>>>> * Authors: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom-at-vmware-dot-com>
>>>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>>>> -#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_device.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <drm/drm_mm.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>>>>>> #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>>>>>>>>>> -#include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>>>>>> /*
>>>>>>>>>> * Currently we use a spinlock for the lock, but a mutex
>>>>>>>>>> *may* be
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -60,8 +61,8 @@ static int ttm_range_man_alloc(struct
>>>>>>>>>> ttm_resource_manager *man,
>>>>>>>>>> struct ttm_resource *mem)
>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>> struct ttm_range_manager *rman = to_range_manager(man);
>>>>>>>>>> + struct ttm_range_mgr_node *node;
>>>>>>>>>> struct drm_mm *mm = &rman->mm;
>>>>>>>>>> - struct drm_mm_node *node;
>>>>>>>>>> enum drm_mm_insert_mode mode;
>>>>>>>>>> unsigned long lpfn;
>>>>>>>>>> int ret;
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -70,7 +71,7 @@ static int ttm_range_man_alloc(struct
>>>>>>>>>> ttm_resource_manager *man,
>>>>>>>>>> if (!lpfn)
>>>>>>>>>> lpfn = man->size;
>>>>>>>>>> - node = kzalloc(sizeof(*node), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>>>>> + node = kzalloc(struct_size(node, mm_nodes, 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm still a bit confused about the situation where a driver
>>>>>>>>> wants to attach private data to a struct ttm_resource without
>>>>>>>>> having to re-implement its own range manager?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Could be cached sg-tables, list of GPU bindings etc. Wouldn't
>>>>>>>>> work with the above unless we have a void *driver_private
>>>>>>>>> member on the struct ttm_resource. Is that the plan going
>>>>>>>>> forward here? Or that the driver actually does the
>>>>>>>>> re-implementation?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't really understand your concern here. The basic idea is
>>>>>>>> that drivers use ttm_resource as a base class for their own
>>>>>>>> implementation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See for example how nouveau does that:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> struct nouveau_mem {
>>>>>>>> struct ttm_resource base;
>>>>>>>> struct nouveau_cli *cli;
>>>>>>>> u8 kind;
>>>>>>>> u8 comp;
>>>>>>>> struct nvif_mem mem;
>>>>>>>> struct nvif_vma vma[2];
>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The range manager is helping driver specific resource managers
>>>>>>>> which want to implement something drm_mm_nodes based. E.g.
>>>>>>>> amdgpu_gtt_mgr and amdgpu_vram_mgr, but it can also be used
>>>>>>>> stand alone.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The ttm_range_mgr_node can then be used as base class for this
>>>>>>>> functionality. I already want to move some more code from
>>>>>>>> amdgpu_vram_mgr.c into the range manager, but that is just
>>>>>>>> minor cleanup work.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure but if you embed a ttm_range_mgr_node in your struct
>>>>>>> i915_resource, and wanted to use the ttm range manager for it,
>>>>>>> it would allocate a struct ttm_range_mgr_node rather than a
>>>>>>> struct i915_resource? Or am I missing something?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, that's the general idea I'm targeting for. I'm just not
>>>>>> fully there yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, I don't fully understand the reply, I described a buggy
>>>>> scenario and you replied that's what we're targeting for?
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I don't seem to understand what you mean here. What is buggy on
>>>> that?
>>>
>>> The buggy thing I'm trying to describe is a scenario where I want to
>>> have a struct i915_ttm_resource which embeds a struct
>>> ttm_range_mgr_node, but there is no way I can tell the generic ttm
>>> range manager to allocate a struct i915_ttm_resource instead of a
>>> struct ttm_range_mgr_node.
>>>
>>> So what I want to be able to do: I have
>>>
>>> struct i915_ttm_resource {
>>> struct i915_gpu_bindings gpu_bindings;
>>> struct ttm_range_mgr_node range_node;
>>> };
>>>
>>> Now I want to be able to share common code as much as possible and
>>> use the generic ttm_range_manager here. How would I go about doing
>>> that with the proposed changes?
>>
>> Ah, yes that is the part I haven't moved over yet. In other words
>> that is not possible yet.
>
> OK, that "yet" sounds good. So this will be possible moving forward?
> (Basically it's the overall design that's not completely clear to me
> yet, not really the code itself)
Yes, absolutely.
Christian.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
>
>
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list