> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2020 8:56 AM > To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>; Xiong, Jianxin <jianxin.xiong@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dri- > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx>; Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>; Vetter, Daniel > <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx>; Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-core v3 4/6] pyverbs: Add dma-buf based MR support > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 12:36:42PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:04:43PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:55:44AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 03:57:41PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > + err = ioctl(dri->fd, DRM_IOCTL_AMDGPU_GEM_CREATE, &gem_create); > > > > > > + if (err) > > > > > > + return err; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + *handle = gem_create.out.handle; > > > > > > + return 0; > > > > > > +} > > > > > > + > > > > > > +static int radeon_alloc(struct dri *dri, size_t size, > > > > > > +uint32_t *handle) > > > > > > > > > > Tbh radeon chips are old enough I wouldn't care. Also doesn't > > > > > support p2p dma-buf, so always going to be in system memory when > > > > > you share. Plus you also need some more flags like I suggested above I think. > > > > > > > > What about nouveau? > > > > > > Reallistically chances that someone wants to use rdma together with > > > the upstream nouveau driver are roughly nil. Imo also needs someone > > > with the right hardware to make sure it works (since the flags are > > > all kinda arcane driver specific stuff testing is really needed). > > > > Well, it would be helpful if we can test the mlx5 part of the > > implementation, and I have a lab stocked with nouveau compatible HW.. > > > > But you are right someone needs to test/etc, so this does not seem > > like Jianxin should worry > > Ah yes sounds good. I can help with trying to find how to allocate vram with nouveau if you don't find it. Caveat is that nouveau doesn't do > dynamic dma-buf exports and hence none of the intersting flows and also not p2p. Not sure how much work it would be to roll that out (iirc > it wasnt that much amdgpu code really, just endless discussions on the interface semantics and how to roll it out without breaking any of > the existing dma-buf users). > > Another thing that just crossed my mind: Do we have a testcase for forcing the eviction? Should be fairly easy to provoke with something > like this: > > - register vram-only buffer with mlx5 and do something that binds it > - allocate enough vram-only buffers to overfill vram (again figuring out > how much vram you have is driver specific) > - touch each buffer with mmap. that should force the mlx5 buffer out. it > might be that eviction isn't lru but preferentially idle buffers (i.e. > not used by hw, so anything register to mlx5 won't qualify as first > victims). so we might need to instead register a ton of buffers with > mlx5 and access them through ibverbs > - do something with mlx5 again to force the rebinding and test it all > keeps working > > That entire invalidate/buffer move flow is the most complex interaction I think. Right now on my side the evict scenario is tested with the "timeout" feature of the AMD gpu. The GPU driver would move all VRAM allocations to system buffer after a certain period of "inactivity" (10s by default). VRAM being accessed by peer DMA is not counted as activity from GPU's POV. I can observe the invalidation/remapping sequence by running an RDMA test for long enough time. I agree having a more generic mechanism to force this scenario is going to be useful. > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
