[RFC PATCH 05/28] drm/gpusvm: Add support for GPU Shared Virtual Memory

[Thomas Hellström]

Hi, Matthew

On Tue, 2024-08-27 at 19:48 -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> +/**
> + * DOC: Overview
> + *
> + * GPU Shared Virtual Memory (GPU SVM) layer for the Direct
> Rendering Manager (DRM)
> + *
> + * The GPU SVM layer is a component of the DRM framework designed to
> manage shared
> + * virtual memory between the CPU and GPU. It enables efficient data
> exchange and
> + * processing for GPU-accelerated applications by allowing memory
> sharing and
> + * synchronization between the CPU's and GPU's virtual address
> spaces.
> + *
> + * Key GPU SVM Components:
> + * - Notifiers: Notifiers: Used for tracking memory intervals and
> notifying the
> + *		GPU of changes, notifiers are sized based on a GPU
> SVM
> + *		initialization parameter, with a recommendation of
> 512M or
> + *		larger. They maintain a Red-BlacK tree and a list of
> ranges that
> + *		fall within the notifier interval. Notifiers are
> tracked within
> + *		a GPU SVM Red-BlacK tree and list and are
> dynamically inserted
> + *		or removed as ranges within the interval are created
> or
> + *		destroyed.
> + * - Ranges: Represent memory ranges mapped in a DRM device and
> managed
> + *	     by GPU SVM. They are sized based on an array of chunk
> sizes, which
> + *	     is a GPU SVM initialization parameter, and the CPU
> address space.
> + *	     Upon GPU fault, the largest aligned chunk that fits
> within the
> + *	     faulting CPU address space is chosen for the range
> size. Ranges are
> + *	     expected to be dynamically allocated on GPU fault and
> removed on an
> + *	     MMU notifier UNMAP event. As mentioned above, ranges
> are tracked in
> + *	     a notifier's Red-Black tree.
> + * - Operations: Define the interface for driver-specific SVM
> operations such as
> + *		 allocation, page collection, migration,
> invalidations, and VRAM
> + *		 release.
> + *

Another question, since ranges, as I understand it, are per gpuvm and
per cpu mm, whereas migration is per device and per cpu_mm, (whe might
have multiple gpuvms mapping the same cpu_mm), I figure the gpu_svm is
per gpuvm, but that makes migration currently inconsistent, right?

/Thomas