[PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/gem: Migrate to system at dma-buf map time

[Thomas Hellström]

Hi, Mike,

On 6/25/21 7:57 PM, Ruhl, Michael J wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom at linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 1:52 PM
>> To: Ruhl, Michael J <michael.j.ruhl at intel.com>; intel-
>> gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: Auld, Matthew <matthew.auld at intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/gem: Migrate to system at dma-buf map
>> time
>>
>>
>> On 6/25/21 7:38 PM, Ruhl, Michael J wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom at linux.intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 12:18 PM
>>>> To: Ruhl, Michael J <michael.j.ruhl at intel.com>; intel-
>>>> gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> Cc: Auld, Matthew <matthew.auld at intel.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/gem: Migrate to system at dma-buf
>> map
>>>> time
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Michael,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for looking at this.
>>>>
>>>> On 6/25/21 6:02 PM, Ruhl, Michael J wrote:
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf
>> Of
>>>>>> Thomas Hellström
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2021 2:31 PM
>>>>>> To: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>>>> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom at linux.intel.com>; Auld,
>>>> Matthew
>>>>>> <matthew.auld at intel.com>
>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/gem: Migrate to system at dma-buf map
>>>> time
>>>>>> Until we support p2p dma or as a complement to that, migrate data
>>>>>> to system memory at dma-buf map time if possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom at linux.intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_dmabuf.c | 9 ++++++++-
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_dmabuf.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_dmabuf.c
>>>>>> index 616c3a2f1baf..a52f885bc09a 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_dmabuf.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_dmabuf.c
>>>>>> @@ -25,7 +25,14 @@ static struct sg_table
>>>> *i915_gem_map_dma_buf(struct
>>>>>> dma_buf_attachment *attachme
>>>>>> 	struct scatterlist *src, *dst;
>>>>>> 	int ret, i;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -	ret = i915_gem_object_pin_pages_unlocked(obj);
>>>>>> +	ret = i915_gem_object_lock_interruptible(obj, NULL);
>>>>> Hmm, I believe in most cases that the caller should be holding the
>>>>> lock (object dma-resv) on this object already.
>>>> Yes, I agree, In particular for other instances of our own driver,  at
>>>> least since the dma_resv introduction.
>>>>
>>>> But I also think that's a pre-existing bug, since
>>>> i915_gem_object_pin_pages_unlocked() will also take the lock.
>>> Ouch yes.  Missed that.
>>>
>>>> I Think we need to initially make the exporter dynamic-capable to
>>>> resolve this, and drop the locking here completely, as dma-buf docs says
>>>> that we're then guaranteed to get called with the object lock held.
>>>>
>>>> I figure if we make the exporter dynamic, we need to migrate already at
>>>> dma_buf_pin time so we don't pin the object in the wrong location.
>>> The exporter as dynamic  (ops->pin is available) is optional, but importer
>>> dynamic (ops->move_notify) is required.
>>>
>>> With that in mind, it would seem that there are three possible combinations
>>> for the migrate to be attempted:
>>>
>>> 1) in the ops->pin function (export_dynamic != import_dynamic, during
>> attach)
>>> 2) in the ops->pin function (export_dynamic and
>> !CONFIG_DMABUF_MOVE_NOTIFY) during mapping
>>> 3) and possibly in ops->map_dma_buf (exort_dynamic iand
>> CONFIG_DMABUF_MOVE_NOTIFY)
>>> Since one possibility has to be in the mapping function, it seems that if we
>>> can figure out the locking, that the migrate should probably be available
>> here.
>>> Mike
>> So perhaps just to initially fix the bug, we could just implement NOP
>> pin() and unpin() callbacks and drop the locking in map_attach() and
>> replace it with an assert_object_held();
> That is the sticky part of the move notify API.
>
> If you do the attach_dynamic you have to have an ops with move_notify.
>
> (https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.13-rc7/source/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c#L730)
>
> If you don't have that, i.e. just the pin interface, the attach will be
> rejected, and you will not get the callbacks.

I understood that as the requirement for move_notify is only if the 
*importer* declares dynamic. A dynamic exporter could choose whether to 
call move_notify() on eviction or to pin and never evict. If the 
importer is non-dynamic, the core calls pin() and the only choice is to 
pin and never evict.

So if we temporarily choose to pin and never evict for *everything*, (as 
the current code does now), I think we should be good for now, and then 
we can implement all fancy p2p and move_notify stuff on top of that.

/Thomas


>
> So I think that the only thing we can do for now is to dop the locking and add the
>
> assert_object_held();
>
> M



>
>> /Thomas
>>