[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/03] Preventing zero GPU virtual address allocation
Chris Wilson
chris at chris-wilson.co.uk
Wed May 20 09:10:58 PDT 2015
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:00:43PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 03:14:06PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 03:09:43PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 04:54:19PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote:
> > > > This patch series (one patch each for libdrm, the kernel, and beignet)
> > > > aims to provide a means to add a context-specific means to prevent
> > > > a mapping to GPU virtual address zero. This is needed at least by
> > > > Beignet (possibly in other use-cases too, though I don't know of any
> > > > other) to allow use of address zero to represent NULL.
> > >
> > > Urm, you cannot allow absolute addressing period. What happens to the
> > > object at 0 when the user reads from it or writes to it? You have to
> > > have an object at 0 for the user's NULL pointer access.
> >
> > I'll mollify that: outside of full-ppgtt where you need to share the VM.
>
> The description is misleading, the new flag doesn't prevent anything from
> getting mapped at 0 but only prevents any bo submitted through execbuf on
> the given context from being bound at address 0. If that would happen
> compute kernels using NULL checks for some things would fall over.
That does not address the issue that *0 is an untrapped runtime bug that
allows writing to other objects or reading from them.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list