Hi Daniel,
On Wed, 2019-02-27 at 06:13:45 -0800, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:20 PM Hyun Kwon <hyun.kwon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > Thanks for the comment.
> >
> > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 04:06:13 -0800, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 12:53 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 12:28:17PM -0800, Hyun Kwon wrote:
> > > > > Add the dmabuf map / unmap interfaces. This allows the user driver
> > > > > to be able to import the external dmabuf and use it from user space.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Hyun Kwon <hyun.kwon@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/uio/Makefile | 2 +-
> > > > > drivers/uio/uio.c | 43 +++++++++
> > > > > drivers/uio/uio_dmabuf.c | 210 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > drivers/uio/uio_dmabuf.h | 26 ++++++
> > > > > include/uapi/linux/uio/uio.h | 33 +++++++
> > > > > 5 files changed, 313 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_dmabuf.c
> > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/uio/uio_dmabuf.h
> > > > > create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/uio/uio.h
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/uio/Makefile b/drivers/uio/Makefile
> > > > > index c285dd2..5da16c7 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/uio/Makefile
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/uio/Makefile
> > > > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > > > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > > > -obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o
> > > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_UIO) += uio.o uio_dmabuf.o
> > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_CIF) += uio_cif.o
> > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_PDRV_GENIRQ) += uio_pdrv_genirq.o
> > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_UIO_DMEM_GENIRQ) += uio_dmem_genirq.o
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/uio/uio.c b/drivers/uio/uio.c
> > > > > index 1313422..6841f98 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/uio/uio.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/uio/uio.c
> > > > > @@ -24,6 +24,12 @@
> > > > > #include <linux/kobject.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/cdev.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/uio_driver.h>
> > > > > +#include <linux/list.h>
> > > > > +#include <linux/mutex.h>
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#include <uapi/linux/uio/uio.h>
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#include "uio_dmabuf.h"
> > > > >
> > > > > #define UIO_MAX_DEVICES (1U << MINORBITS)
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -454,6 +460,8 @@ static irqreturn_t uio_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > > > > struct uio_listener {
> > > > > struct uio_device *dev;
> > > > > s32 event_count;
> > > > > + struct list_head dbufs;
> > > > > + struct mutex dbufs_lock; /* protect @dbufs */
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)
> > > > > @@ -500,6 +508,9 @@ static int uio_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)
> > > > > if (ret)
> > > > > goto err_infoopen;
> > > > >
> > > > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&listener->dbufs);
> > > > > + mutex_init(&listener->dbufs_lock);
> > > > > +
> > > > > return 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > err_infoopen:
> > > > > @@ -529,6 +540,10 @@ static int uio_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)
> > > > > struct uio_listener *listener = filep->private_data;
> > > > > struct uio_device *idev = listener->dev;
> > > > >
> > > > > + ret = uio_dmabuf_cleanup(idev, &listener->dbufs, &listener->dbufs_lock);
> > > > > + if (ret)
> > > > > + dev_err(&idev->dev, "failed to clean up the dma bufs\n");
> > > > > +
> > > > > mutex_lock(&idev->info_lock);
> > > > > if (idev->info && idev->info->release)
> > > > > ret = idev->info->release(idev->info, inode);
> > > > > @@ -652,6 +667,33 @@ static ssize_t uio_write(struct file *filep, const char __user *buf,
> > > > > return retval ? retval : sizeof(s32);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > +static long uio_ioctl(struct file *filep, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> > > >
> > > > We have resisted adding a uio ioctl for a long time, can't you do this
> > > > through sysfs somehow?
> > > >
> > > > A meta-comment about your ioctl structure:
> > > >
> > > > > +#define UIO_DMABUF_DIR_BIDIR 1
> > > > > +#define UIO_DMABUF_DIR_TO_DEV 2
> > > > > +#define UIO_DMABUF_DIR_FROM_DEV 3
> > > > > +#define UIO_DMABUF_DIR_NONE 4
> > > >
> > > > enumerated type?
> > > >
> > > > > +
> > > > > +struct uio_dmabuf_args {
> > > > > + __s32 dbuf_fd;
> > > > > + __u64 dma_addr;
> > > > > + __u64 size;
> > > > > + __u32 dir;
> > > >
> > > > Why the odd alignment? Are you sure this is the best packing for such a
> > > > structure?
> > > >
> > > > Why is dbuf_fd __s32? dir can be __u8, right?
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that dma layer very well, it would be good to get some
> > > > review from others to see if this really is even a viable thing to do.
> > > > The fd handling seems a bit "odd" here, but maybe I just do not
> > > > understand it.
> > >
> > > Frankly looks like a ploy to sidestep review by graphics folks. We'd
> > > ask for the userspace first :-)
> >
> > Please refer to pull request [1].
> >
> > For any interest in more details, the libmetal is the abstraction layer
> > which provides platform independent APIs. The backend implementation
> > can be selected per different platforms: ex, rtos, linux,
> > standalone (xilinx),,,. For Linux, it supports UIO / vfio as of now.
> > The actual user space drivers sit on top of libmetal. Such drivers can be
> > found in [2]. This is why I try to avoid any device specific code in
> > Linux kernel.
> >
> > >
> > > Also, exporting dma_addr to userspace is considered a very bad idea.
> >
> > I agree, hence the RFC to pick some brains. :-) Would it make sense
> > if this call doesn't export the physicall address, but instead takes
> > only the dmabuf fd and register offsets to be programmed?
> >
> > > If you want to do this properly, you need a minimal in-kernel memory
> > > manager, and those tend to be based on top of drm_gem.c and merged
> > > through the gpu tree. The last place where we accidentally leaked a
> > > dma addr for gpu buffers was in the fbdev code, and we plugged that
> > > one with
> >
> > Could you please help me understand how having a in-kernel memory manager
> > helps? Isn't it just moving same dmabuf import / paddr export functionality
> > in different modules: kernel memory manager vs uio. In fact, Xilinx does have
> > such memory manager based on drm gem in downstream. But for this time we took
> > the approach of implementing this through generic dmabuf allocator, ION, and
> > enabling the import capability in the UIO infrastructure instead.
>
> There's a group of people working on upstreaming a xilinx drm driver
> already. Which driver are we talking about? Can you pls provide a link
> to that xilinx drm driver?
>
The one I was pushing [1] is implemented purely for display, and not
intended for anything other than that as of now. What I'm refering to above
is part of Xilinx FPGA (acceleration) runtime [2]. As far as I know,
it's planned to be upstreamed, but not yet started. The Xilinx runtime
software has its own in-kernel memory manager based on drm_cma_gem with
its own ioctls [3].
Thanks,
-hyun
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10513001/
[2] https://github.com/Xilinx/XRT
[3] https://github.com/Xilinx/XRT/tree/master/src/runtime_src/driver/zynq/drm
> Thanks, Daniel
>
> > Thanks,
> > -hyun
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/OpenAMP/libmetal/pull/82/commits/951e2762bd487c98919ad12f2aa81773d8fe7859
> > [2] https://github.com/Xilinx/embeddedsw/tree/master/XilinxProcessorIPLib/drivers
> >
> > >
> > > commit 4be9bd10e22dfc7fc101c5cf5969ef2d3a042d8a (tag:
> > > drm-misc-next-fixes-2018-10-03)
> > > Author: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Fri Sep 28 14:05:55 2018 +0200
> > >
> > > drm/fb_helper: Allow leaking fbdev smem_start
> > >
> > > Together with cuse the above patch should be enough to implement a drm
> > > driver entirely in userspace at least.
> > >
> > > Cheers, Daniel
> > > --
> > > Daniel Vetter
> > > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> > > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
