[PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/dgfx: Block rpm for active mmap mappings
Nilawar, Badal
badal.nilawar at intel.com
Fri Dec 8 07:29:05 UTC 2023
On 07-12-2023 18:36, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 07/12/2023 11:26, Matthew Auld wrote:
>> On 06/12/2023 13:34, Badal Nilawar wrote:
>>> Block rpm for discrete cards when mmap mappings are active.
>>> Ideally rpm wake ref should be taken in vm_open call and put in vm_close
>>> call but it is seen that vm_open doesn't get called for xe_gem_vm_ops.
>>> Therefore rpm wake ref is being get in xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap and put
>>> in vm_close.
>>>
>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>>> Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar at intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>>> index 72dc4a4eed4e..5741948a2a51 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_tt.h>
>>> #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
>>> +#include "i915_drv.h"
>>
>> Do we need this?
>>
>>> #include "xe_device.h"
>>> #include "xe_dma_buf.h"
>>> #include "xe_drm_client.h"
>>> @@ -1158,17 +1159,47 @@ static vm_fault_t xe_gem_fault(struct
>>> vm_fault *vmf)
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>> +static void xe_ttm_bo_vm_close(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>>> +{
>>> + struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo = vma->vm_private_data;
>>> + struct drm_device *ddev = tbo->base.dev;
>>> + struct xe_device *xe = to_xe_device(ddev);
>>> +
>>> + ttm_bo_vm_close(vma);
>>> +
>>> + if (tbo->resource->bus.is_iomem)
>>> + xe_device_mem_access_put(xe);
>
> Are you sure this works as expected? Say if the user partially unmaps
> something?
>
> map = mmap(obj, size);
> unmap(map, size/2);
> unmap(map, size);
>
> That would be one mmap but multiple vm_close calls leading to an
> imbalance in the RPM ref. I think we need the access_get in the vm_open
> also?I haven't tried partial mmap but for single mmap-unmap I observed
equal number of xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap and vm_close call. Will try partial
mmap.
For mem_access_get in vm_open, initially we were trying the same but
observed that vm_open never get called.
In fact i915 i915_gem_mman.c we found this comment for vm_open.
/*
* When we install vm_ops for mmap we are too late for
* the vm_ops->open() which increases the ref_count of
* this obj and then it gets decreased by the vm_ops->close().
* To balance this increase the obj ref_count here.
*/
Does similar reason applicable for xe vm_open as well?
Regards,
Badal
>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static const struct vm_operations_struct xe_gem_vm_ops = {
>>> .fault = xe_gem_fault,
>>> .open = ttm_bo_vm_open,
>>> - .close = ttm_bo_vm_close,
>>> + .close = xe_ttm_bo_vm_close,
>>> .access = ttm_bo_vm_access
>>> };
>>> +int xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap(struct drm_gem_object *gem,
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>>> +{
>>> + struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo = drm_gem_ttm_of_gem(gem);
>>> + struct drm_device *ddev = tbo->base.dev;
>>> + struct xe_device *xe = to_xe_device(ddev);
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + ret = drm_gem_ttm_mmap(gem, vma);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (tbo->resource->bus.is_iomem)
>>> + xe_device_mem_access_get(xe);
>>
>> Checking is_iomem outside of the usual locking is racy. One issue here
>> is that is_iomem can freely change at any point (like at fault time)
>> so when vm_close is called you can easily get an an unbalanced RPM ref
>> count. For example io_mem is false here but later becomes true in
>> bo_vm_close and then we call mem_access_put even though we never
>> called mem_access_get.
>>
>> Maybe check the possible placements of the object instead since that
>> is immutable?
>>
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static const struct drm_gem_object_funcs xe_gem_object_funcs = {
>>> .free = xe_gem_object_free,
>>> .close = xe_gem_object_close,
>>> - .mmap = drm_gem_ttm_mmap,
>>> + .mmap = xe_drm_gem_ttm_mmap,
>>> .export = xe_gem_prime_export,
>>> .vm_ops = &xe_gem_vm_ops,
>>> };
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list