On 7/9/2014 5:40 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Olav Haugan <ohaugan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 7/8/2014 4:49 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Olav Haugan <ohaugan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Hi Hiroshi,
>>>>
>>>> On 7/3/2014 9:29 PM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
>>>>> Hi Olav,
>>>>>
>>>>> Olav Haugan <ohaugan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mapping and unmapping are more often than not in the critical path.
>>>>>> map_range and unmap_range allows SMMU driver implementations to optimize
>>>>>> the process of mapping and unmapping buffers into the SMMU page tables.
>>>>>> Instead of mapping one physical address, do TLB operation (expensive),
>>>>>> mapping, do TLB operation, mapping, do TLB operation the driver can map
>>>>>> a scatter-gatherlist of physically contiguous pages into one virtual
>>>>>> address space and then at the end do one TLB operation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally, the mapping operation would be faster in general since
>>>>>> clients does not have to keep calling map API over and over again for
>>>>>> each physically contiguous chunk of memory that needs to be mapped to a
>>>>>> virtually contiguous region.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Olav Haugan <ohaugan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> include/linux/iommu.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>>>>>> index e5555fc..f2a6b80 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
>>>>>> @@ -898,6 +898,30 @@ size_t iommu_unmap(struct iommu_domain *domain, unsigned long iova, size_t size)
>>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_unmap);
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +int iommu_map_range(struct iommu_domain *domain, unsigned int iova,
>>>>>> + struct scatterlist *sg, unsigned int len, int prot)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + if (unlikely(domain->ops->map_range == NULL))
>>>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + BUG_ON(iova & (~PAGE_MASK));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return domain->ops->map_range(domain, iova, sg, len, prot);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_map_range);
>>>>>
>>>>> We have the similar one internally, which is named, "iommu_map_sg()",
>>>>> called from DMA API.
>>>>
>>>> Great, so this new API will be useful to more people!
>>>>
>>>>>> +int iommu_unmap_range(struct iommu_domain *domain, unsigned int iova,
>>>>>> + unsigned int len)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + if (unlikely(domain->ops->unmap_range == NULL))
>>>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + BUG_ON(iova & (~PAGE_MASK));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return domain->ops->unmap_range(domain, iova, len);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_unmap_range);
>>>>>
>>>>> Can the existing iommu_unmap() do the same?
>>>>
>>>> I believe iommu_unmap() behaves a bit differently because it will keep
>>>> on calling domain->ops->unmap() until everything is unmapped instead of
>>>> letting the iommu implementation take care of unmapping everything in
>>>> one call.
>>>>
>>>> I am abandoning the patch series since our driver was not accepted.
>>>> However, if there are no objections I will resubmit this patch (PATCH
>>>> 2/7) as an independent patch to add this new map_range API.
>>>
>>> +1 for map_range().. I've seen for gpu workloads, at least, it is the
>>> downstream map_range() API is quite beneficial. It was worth at
>>> least a few fps in xonotic.
>>>
>>> And, possibly getting off the subject a bit, but I was wondering about
>>> the possibility of going one step further and batching up mapping
>>> and/or unmapping multiple buffers (ranges) at once. I have a pretty
>>> convenient sync point in drm/msm to flush out multiple mappings before
>>> kicking gpu.
>>
>> I think you should be able to do that with this API already - at least
>> the mapping part since we are passing in a sg list (this could be a
>> chained sglist).
>
> What I mean by batching up is mapping and unmapping multiple sglists
> each at different iova's with minmal cpu cache and iommu tlb flushes..
>
> Ideally we'd let the IOMMU driver be clever and build out all 2nd
> level tables before inserting into first level tables (to minimize cpu
> cache flushing).. also, there is probably a reasonable chance that
> we'd be mapping a new buffer into existing location, so there might be
> some potential to reuse existing 2nd level tables (and save a tiny bit
> of free/alloc). I've not thought too much about how that would look
> in code.. might be kinda, umm, fun..
>
> But at an API level, we should be able to do a bunch of
> map/unmap_range's with one flush.
>
> Maybe it could look like a sequence of iommu_{map,unmap}_range()
> followed by iommu_flush()?
>
So we could add another argument ("options") in the range api that
allows you to indicate whether you want to invalidate TLB or not.
Thanks,
Olav
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
