On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 09:00:11PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> So, short answer is, it is left to the exporter to decide. The dma-buf >> framework should not even attempt to decide or enforce any of the >> above. >> >> At each dma_buf_attach(), there's a callback to the exporter, where >> the exporter can decide, if it intends to handle these kind of cases, >> on the best way forward. >> >> The exporter might, for example, decide to migrate backing storage, > > That's a decision which the exporter can not take. Think about it... > > If subsystem Y has mapped the buffer, it could be accessing the buffer's > backing storage at the same time that subsystem Z tries to attach to the > buffer. The *theory* is that Y is map/unmap'ing the buffer around each use, so there will be some point where things could be migrated and remapped.. in practice, I am not sure that anyone is doing this yet. Probably it would be reasonable if a more restrictive subsystem tried to attach after the buffer was already allocated and mapped in a way that don't meet the new constraints, then -EBUSY. But from a quick look it seems like there needs to be a slight fixup to not return 0 if calc_constraints() fails.. > Once the buffer has been exported to another user, the exporter has > effectively lost control over mediating accesses to that buffer. > > All that it can do with the way the dma-buf API is today is to allocate > a _different_ scatter list pointing at the same backing storage which > satisfies the segment size and number of segments, etc. > > There's also another issue which you haven't addressed. What if several > attachments result in lowering max_segment_size and max_segment_count > such that: > > max_segment_size * max_segment_count < dmabuf->size > > but individually, the attachments allow dmabuf->size to be represented > as a scatterlist? Quite possibly for some of these edge some of cases, some of the dma-buf exporters are going to need to get more clever (ie. hand off different scatterlists to different clients). Although I think by far the two common cases will be "I can support anything via an iommu/mmu" and "I need phys contig". But that isn't an issue w/ dma-buf itself, so much as it is an issue w/ drivers. I guess there would be more interest in fixing up drivers when actual hw comes along that needs it.. BR, -R > If an exporter were to take notice of the max_segment_size and > max_segment_count, the resulting buffer is basically unrepresentable > as a scatterlist. > >> > Please consider the possible sequences of use (such as the scenario >> > above) when creating or augmenting an API. >> > >> >> I tried to think of the scenarios I could think of, but If you still >> feel this approach doesn't help with your concerns, I'll graciously >> accept advice to improve it. > > See the new one above :) > > -- > FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up > according to speedtest.net. _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
