Hi Ludwig,
P2P transactions are still *very* experimental at the moment and take a
lot of expertise to get working in a general setup. It will definitely
require changes to the kernel, including the drivers of all the devices
you are trying to make talk to eachother. If you're up for it you can
take a look at:
https://github.com/sbates130272/linux-p2pmem/
Which has our current rough work making NVMe fabrics use p2p transactions.
Logan
On 10/20/2017 6:36 AM, Ludwig Petrosyan wrote:
Dear Linux kernel group
my name is Ludwig Petrosyan I am working in DESY (Germany)
we are responsible for the control system of all accelerators in DESY.
For a 7-8 years we have switched to MTCA.4 systems and using PCIe as a
central Bus.
I am mostly responsible for the Linux drivers of the AMC Cards (PCIe
endpoints).
The idea is start to use peer to peer transaction for PCIe endpoint (DMA
and/or usual Read/Write)
Could You please advise me where to start, is there some Documentation
how to do it.
with best regards
Ludwig
On 11/21/2016 09:36 PM, Deucher, Alexander wrote:
This is certainly not the first time this has been brought up, but I'd
like to try and get some consensus on the best way to move this
forward. Allowing devices to talk directly improves performance and
reduces latency by avoiding the use of staging buffers in system
memory. Also in cases where both devices are behind a switch, it
avoids the CPU entirely. Most current APIs (DirectGMA, PeerDirect,
CUDA, HSA) that deal with this are pointer based. Ideally we'd be
able to take a CPU virtual address and be able to get to a physical
address taking into account IOMMUs, etc. Having struct pages for the
memory would allow it to work more generally and wouldn't require as
much explicit support in drivers that wanted to use it.
Some use cases:
1. Storage devices streaming directly to GPU device memory
2. GPU device memory to GPU device memory streaming
3. DVB/V4L/SDI devices streaming directly to GPU device memory
4. DVB/V4L/SDI devices streaming directly to storage devices
Here is a relatively simple example of how this could work for
testing. This is obviously not a complete solution.
- Device memory will be registered with Linux memory sub-system by
created corresponding struct page structures for device memory
- get_user_pages_fast() will return corresponding struct pages when
CPU address points to the device memory
- put_page() will deal with struct pages for device memory
Previously proposed solutions and related proposals:
1.P2P DMA
DMA-API/PCI map_peer_resource support for peer-to-peer
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg44560.html)
Pros: Low impact, already largely reviewed.
Cons: requires explicit support in all drivers that want to support
it, doesn't handle S/G in device memory.
2. ZONE_DEVICE IO
Direct I/O and DMA for persistent memory
(https://lwn.net/Articles/672457/)
Add support for ZONE_DEVICE IO memory with struct pages.
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8583221/)
Pro: Doesn't waste system memory for ZONE metadata
Cons: CPU access to ZONE metadata slow, may be lost, corrupted on
device reset.
3. DMA-BUF
RDMA subsystem DMA-BUF support
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg38748.html)
Pros: uses existing dma-buf interface
Cons: dma-buf is handle based, requires explicit dma-buf support in
drivers.
4. iopmem
iopmem : A block device for PCIe memory
(https://lwn.net/Articles/703895/)
5. HMM
Heterogeneous Memory Management
(http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1611.2/02473.html)
6. Some new mmap-like interface that takes a userptr and a length and
returns a dma-buf and offset?
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
