Re: [PATCH 1/9] dma-buf: start caching of sg_table objects

[Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx>]

Am 08.05.19 um 11:15 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 10:13:30AM +0200, Christian König wrote:
> > To allow a smooth transition from pinning buffer objects to dynamic
> > invalidation we first start to cache the sg_table for an attachment.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   include/linux/dma-buf.h   | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >   2 files changed, 38 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
> > index 7c858020d14b..775e13f54083 100644
> > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
> > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
> > @@ -573,6 +573,20 @@ struct dma_buf_attachment *dma_buf_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
> >   	list_add(&attach->node, &dmabuf->attachments);
> >   
> >   	mutex_unlock(&dmabuf->lock);
> > +
> > +	if (!dma_buf_is_dynamic(dmabuf)) {
> > +		struct sg_table *sgt;
> > +
> > +		sgt = dmabuf->ops->map_dma_buf(attach, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> > +		if (!sgt)
> > +			sgt = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > +		if (IS_ERR(sgt)) {
> > +			dma_buf_detach(dmabuf, attach);
> > +			return ERR_CAST(sgt);
> > +		}
> > +		attach->sgt = sgt;
> > +	}
> > +
> >   	return attach;
> >   
> >   err_attach:
> > @@ -595,6 +609,10 @@ void dma_buf_detach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct dma_buf_attachment *attach)
> >   	if (WARN_ON(!dmabuf || !attach))
> >   		return;
> >   
> > +	if (attach->sgt)
> > +		dmabuf->ops->unmap_dma_buf(attach, attach->sgt,
> > +					   DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> > +
> >   	mutex_lock(&dmabuf->lock);
> >   	list_del(&attach->node);
> >   	if (dmabuf->ops->detach)
> > @@ -630,6 +648,9 @@ struct sg_table *dma_buf_map_attachment(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach,
> >   	if (WARN_ON(!attach || !attach->dmabuf))
> >   		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> >   
> > +	if (attach->sgt)
> > +		return attach->sgt;
> > +
> >   	sg_table = attach->dmabuf->ops->map_dma_buf(attach, direction);
> >   	if (!sg_table)
> >   		sg_table = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> > @@ -657,6 +678,9 @@ void dma_buf_unmap_attachment(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach,
> >   	if (WARN_ON(!attach || !attach->dmabuf || !sg_table))
> >   		return;
> >   
> > +	if (attach->sgt == sg_table)
> > +		return;
> > +
> >   	attach->dmabuf->ops->unmap_dma_buf(attach, sg_table,
> >   						direction);
> >   }
> > diff --git a/include/linux/dma-buf.h b/include/linux/dma-buf.h
> > index 58725f890b5b..52031fdc75bb 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/dma-buf.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/dma-buf.h
> > @@ -322,6 +322,7 @@ struct dma_buf_attachment {
> >   	struct dma_buf *dmabuf;
> >   	struct device *dev;
> >   	struct list_head node;
> > +	struct sg_table *sgt;
> >   	void *priv;
> >   };
> >   
> > @@ -373,6 +374,19 @@ static inline void get_dma_buf(struct dma_buf *dmabuf)
> >   	get_file(dmabuf->file);
> >   }
> >   
> > +/**
> > + * dma_buf_is_dynamic - check if a DMA-buf uses dynamic mappings.
> > + * @dmabuf: the DMA-buf to check
> > + *
> > + * Returns true if a DMA-buf exporter wants to create dynamic sg table mappings
> > + * for each attachment. False if only a single static sg table should be used.
> > + */
> > +static inline bool dma_buf_is_dynamic(struct dma_buf *dmabuf)
> > +{
> > +	/* Always use a static mapping for now */
> > +	return false;
> Hm I still expect that later on we'll want this to be decided by the
> attachment: It's only dynamic if both the exporter and the importer
> support dynamic dma-buf management, otherwise we need to pin.

Yeah, essentially we need to handle the following cases:

1. Static DMA-buf and the exporter doesn't want caching.
2. Static DMA-buf and the exporter does want caching.
3. Dynamic DMA-buf and we use caching as a workaround for smooth transition.
4. Dynamic DMA-buf and caching doesn't make much sense.

So far we only support 3 & 4 and not 1 & 2. Could be that this gets much 
more complicated, but I would only want to add this complicated code if 
we really find that we need it.

> But anyway, I feel like we need to go over the entire thing anyway once
> more when p2p has landed, on this:
>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>

Thanks for the review, next question how do we merge this? Through drm-misc?

Regards,
Christian.

> > +}
> > +
> >   struct dma_buf_attachment *dma_buf_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
> >   							struct device *dev);
> >   void dma_buf_detach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf,
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dri-devel mailing list
> > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel