[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Add ppgtt->kunmap_page_dma vfunc

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 18/05/16 13:22, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 01:06:06PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> Rather than asking itself "am I a Broadwell, am I a Cherryview,
>> or am I neither of the two" on on low level page table operations,
>> like inserting and clearing PTEs; add a new vfunc kunmap_page_dma
>> and set it to appropriate flavour at ppgtt init time.
>>
>> v2: Fix platfrom condition and group vfunc init more together.
>>      (Daniele Ceraolo Spurio)
>
> Or we can take a different approach and use a WC mapping for the page.
>
> The patch is a bit messy since we need to feed not the device into the
> unmap function but the vm, but the guts are:
>
> @@ -323,19 +323,21 @@ static gen6_pte_t iris_pte_encode(dma_addr_t addr,
>          return pte;
>   }
>
> -static int __setup_page_dma(struct drm_device *dev,
> -                           struct i915_page_dma *p, gfp_t flags)
> +static int __setup_page_dma(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> +                           struct i915_page_dma *p,
> +                           gfp_t flags)
>   {
> -       struct device *device = &dev->pdev->dev;
> -
>          p->page = alloc_page(flags);
>          if (!p->page)
>                  return -ENOMEM;
>
> -       p->daddr = dma_map_page(device,
> -                               p->page, 0, 4096, PCI_DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> +       if (vm->pt_kmap_wc)
> +               set_pages_array_wc(&p->page, 1);
> +
> +       p->daddr = dma_map_page(vm->dma, p->page, 0, PAGE_SIZE,
> +                               PCI_DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
>
> -       if (dma_mapping_error(device, p->daddr)) {
> +       if (dma_mapping_error(vm->dma, p->daddr)) {
>                  __free_page(p->page);
>                  return -EINVAL;
>          }
> @@ -343,94 +345,89 @@ static int __setup_page_dma(struct drm_device *dev,
>          return 0;
>   }
>
> -static int setup_page_dma(struct drm_device *dev, struct i915_page_dma *p)
> +static int setup_page_dma(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> +                         struct i915_page_dma *p)
>   {
> -       return __setup_page_dma(dev, p, I915_GFP_DMA);
> +       return __setup_page_dma(vm, p, I915_GFP_DMA);
>   }
>
> -static void cleanup_page_dma(struct drm_device *dev, struct i915_page_dma *p)
> +static void cleanup_page_dma(struct i915_address_space *vm,
> +                            struct i915_page_dma *p)
>   {
> -       if (WARN_ON(!p->page))
> -               return;
> +       dma_unmap_page(vm->dma, p->daddr, PAGE_SIZE, PCI_DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> +
> +       if (vm->pt_kmap_wc)
> +               set_pages_array_wb(&p->page, 1);
>
> -       dma_unmap_page(&dev->pdev->dev, p->daddr, 4096, PCI_DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
>          __free_page(p->page);
> -       memset(p, 0, sizeof(*p));
>   }
>
>
>
> @@ -1484,8 +1475,16 @@ static int gen8_ppgtt_init(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt)
>          ppgtt->base.bind_vma = ppgtt_bind_vma;
>          ppgtt->debug_dump = gen8_dump_ppgtt;
>
> +       /* There are only few exceptions for gen >=6. chv and bxt.
> +        * And we are not sure about the latter so play safe for now.
> +        */
> +       if (IS_CHERRYVIEW(ppgtt->base.dev) || IS_BROXTON(ppgtt->base.dev)) {
> +               ppgtt->base.pt_kmap_wc = true;
> +               ppgtt->base.pt_kmap_prot = pgprot_writecombine(PAGE_KERNEL_IO);
> +       }
> +
>
> Advantage: we avoid the clflush after every update
> Disadvantage: we invoke set_memory_*() on every page used by the ppggtt.
> (To reduce that cost, I have in made keeping a pagevec cache of WC
> pages.)
>
> Sadly, we can't just use kmap_atomic_prot() as it is 32-bit only!!!
>
> Note that I started with exactly this patch (using a kunmap vfunc) many
> moons ago and switched to the pgprot_t based approach instead.

The pattern of writes is such that write-combine makes a difference here 
versus an explicit flush? Taking into consideration the complexity of 
the pagevec cache you mention is required for the set_memory_wc route?

Many moons ago comment makes me think we could have at least had an 
inter-rim vfunc solution in place all this time.

Regards,

Tvrtko