[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/1] drm/xen-zcopy: Add Xen zero-copy helper DRM driver
On 24/04/18 12:14, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > On 04/24/2018 01:01 PM, Wei Liu wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:08:41AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> On 24/04/18 11:03, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>> On 04/24/2018 11:40 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>> On 24/04/18 10:07, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>>>> On 04/24/2018 10:51 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>>> On 24/04/18 07:43, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>>>>>> On 04/24/2018 01:41 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 04/23/2018 08:10 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 04/23/2018 02:52 PM, Wei Liu wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 02:25:20PM +0300, Oleksandr >>>>>>>>>>> Andrushchenko >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the gntdev. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think this is generic enough that it could be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implemented by a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> device not tied to Xen. AFAICT the hyper_dma guys also wanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>> something similar to this. >>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't just wrap random userspace memory into a dma-buf. >>>>>>>>>>>>> We've >>>>>>>>>>>>> just had >>>>>>>>>>>>> this discussion with kvm/qemu folks, who proposed just >>>>>>>>>>>>> that, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> after a >>>>>>>>>>>>> bit of discussion they'll now try to have a driver which just >>>>>>>>>>>>> wraps a >>>>>>>>>>>>> memfd into a dma-buf. >>>>>>>>>>>> So, we have to decide either we introduce a new driver >>>>>>>>>>>> (say, under drivers/xen/xen-dma-buf) or extend the existing >>>>>>>>>>>> gntdev/balloon to support dma-buf use-cases. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Can anybody from Xen community express their preference here? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Oleksandr talked to me on IRC about this, he said a few IOCTLs >>>>>>>>>>> need to >>>>>>>>>>> be added to either existing drivers or a new driver. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I went through this thread twice and skimmed through the >>>>>>>>>>> relevant >>>>>>>>>>> documents, but I couldn't see any obvious pros and cons for >>>>>>>>>>> either >>>>>>>>>>> approach. So I don't really have an opinion on this. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But, assuming if implemented in existing drivers, those IOCTLs >>>>>>>>>>> need to >>>>>>>>>>> be added to different drivers, which means userspace program >>>>>>>>>>> needs to >>>>>>>>>>> write more code and get more handles, it would be slightly >>>>>>>>>>> better to >>>>>>>>>>> implement a new driver from that perspective. >>>>>>>>>> If gntdev/balloon extension is still considered: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All the IOCTLs will be in gntdev driver (in current xen-zcopy >>>>>>>>>> terminology): >>>>>>>>>> - DRM_ICOTL_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_FROM_REFS >>>>>>>>>> - DRM_IOCTL_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_TO_REFS >>>>>>>>>> - DRM_IOCTL_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_WAIT_FREE >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Balloon driver extension, which is needed for contiguous/DMA >>>>>>>>>> buffers, will be to provide new *kernel API*, no UAPI is needed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So I am obviously a bit late to this thread, but why do you need >>>>>>>>> to add >>>>>>>>> new ioctls to gntdev and balloon? Doesn't this driver manage to do >>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>> you want without any extensions? >>>>>>>> 1. I only (may) need to add IOCTLs to gntdev >>>>>>>> 2. balloon driver needs to be extended, so it can allocate >>>>>>>> contiguous (DMA) memory, not IOCTLs/UAPI here, all lives >>>>>>>> in the kernel. >>>>>>>> 3. The reason I need to extend gnttab with new IOCTLs is to >>>>>>>> provide new functionality to create a dma-buf from grant references >>>>>>>> and to produce grant references for a dma-buf. This is what I >>>>>>>> have as >>>>>>>> UAPI >>>>>>>> description for xen-zcopy driver: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. DRM_IOCTL_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_FROM_REFS >>>>>>>> This will create a DRM dumb buffer from grant references provided >>>>>>>> by the frontend. The intended usage is: >>>>>>>> - Frontend >>>>>>>> - creates a dumb/display buffer and allocates memory >>>>>>>> - grants foreign access to the buffer pages >>>>>>>> - passes granted references to the backend >>>>>>>> - Backend >>>>>>>> - issues DRM_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_FROM_REFS ioctl to map >>>>>>>> granted references and create a dumb buffer >>>>>>>> - requests handle to fd conversion via >>>>>>>> DRM_IOCTL_PRIME_HANDLE_TO_FD >>>>>>>> - requests real HW driver/consumer to import the PRIME >>>>>>>> buffer >>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>> DRM_IOCTL_PRIME_FD_TO_HANDLE >>>>>>>> - uses handle returned by the real HW driver >>>>>>>> - at the end: >>>>>>>> o closes real HW driver's handle with DRM_IOCTL_GEM_CLOSE >>>>>>>> o closes zero-copy driver's handle with DRM_IOCTL_GEM_CLOSE >>>>>>>> o closes file descriptor of the exported buffer >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. DRM_IOCTL_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_TO_REFS >>>>>>>> This will grant references to a dumb/display buffer's memory >>>>>>>> provided by >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> backend. The intended usage is: >>>>>>>> - Frontend >>>>>>>> - requests backend to allocate dumb/display buffer and grant >>>>>>>> references >>>>>>>> to its pages >>>>>>>> - Backend >>>>>>>> - requests real HW driver to create a dumb with >>>>>>>> DRM_IOCTL_MODE_CREATE_DUMB >>>>>>>> - requests handle to fd conversion via >>>>>>>> DRM_IOCTL_PRIME_HANDLE_TO_FD >>>>>>>> - requests zero-copy driver to import the PRIME buffer with >>>>>>>> DRM_IOCTL_PRIME_FD_TO_HANDLE >>>>>>>> - issues DRM_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_TO_REFS ioctl to >>>>>>>> grant references to the buffer's memory. >>>>>>>> - passes grant references to the frontend >>>>>>>> - at the end: >>>>>>>> - closes zero-copy driver's handle with DRM_IOCTL_GEM_CLOSE >>>>>>>> - closes real HW driver's handle with DRM_IOCTL_GEM_CLOSE >>>>>>>> - closes file descriptor of the imported buffer >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3. DRM_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_WAIT_FREE >>>>>>>> This will block until the dumb buffer with the wait handle >>>>>>>> provided be >>>>>>>> freed: >>>>>>>> this is needed for synchronization between frontend and backend in >>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>> frontend provides grant references of the buffer via >>>>>>>> DRM_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_FROM_REFS IOCTL and which must be released >>>>>>>> before >>>>>>>> backend replies with XENDISPL_OP_DBUF_DESTROY response. >>>>>>>> wait_handle must be the same value returned while calling >>>>>>>> DRM_XEN_ZCOPY_DUMB_FROM_REFS IOCTL. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, as you can see the above functionality is not covered by the >>>>>>>> existing UAPI >>>>>>>> of the gntdev driver. >>>>>>>> Now, if we change dumb -> dma-buf and remove DRM code (which is >>>>>>>> only a >>>>>>>> wrapper >>>>>>>> here on top of dma-buf) we get new driver for dma-buf for Xen. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is why I have 2 options here: either create a dedicated driver >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>> (e.g. re-work xen-zcopy to be DRM independent and put it under >>>>>>>> drivers/xen/xen-dma-buf, for example) or extend the existing gntdev >>>>>>>> driver >>>>>>>> with the above UAPI + make changes to the balloon driver to provide >>>>>>>> kernel >>>>>>>> API for DMA buffer allocations. >>>>>>> Which user component would use the new ioctls? >>>>>> It is currently used by the display backend [1] and will >>>>>> probably be used by the hyper-dmabuf frontend/backend >>>>>> (Dongwon from Intel can provide more info on this). >>>>>>> I'm asking because I'm not very fond of adding more linux specific >>>>>>> functions to libgnttab which are not related to a specific Xen >>>>>>> version, >>>>>>> but to a kernel version. >>>>>> Hm, I was not thinking about this UAPI to be added to libgnttab. >>>>>> It seems it can be used directly w/o wrappers in user-space >>>>> Would this program use libgnttab in parallel? >>>> In case of the display backend - yes, for shared rings, >>>> extracting grefs from displif protocol it uses gntdev via >>>> helper library [1] >>>>> If yes how would the two >>>>> usage paths be combined (same applies to the separate driver, btw)? >>>>> The >>>>> gntdev driver manages resources per file descriptor and libgnttab is >>>>> hiding the file descriptor it is using for a connection. >>>> Ah, at the moment the UAPI was not used in parallel as there were >>>> 2 drivers for that: gntdev + xen-zcopy with different UAPIs. >>>> But now, if we extend gntdev with the new API then you are rigth: >>>> either libgnttab needs to be extended or that new part of the >>>> gntdev UAPI needs to be open-coded by the backend >>>>> Or would the >>>>> user program use only the new driver for communicating with the gntdev >>>>> driver? In this case it might be an option to extend the gntdev driver >>>>> to present a new device (e.g. "gntdmadev") for that purpose. >>>> No, it seems that libgnttab and this new driver's UAPI will be used >>>> in parallel >>>>>>> So doing this in a separate driver seems to be the better option in >>>>>>> this regard. >>>>>> Well, from maintenance POV it is easier for me to have it all in >>>>>> a separate driver as all dma-buf related functionality will >>>>>> reside at one place. This also means that no changes to existing >>>>>> drivers will be needed (if it is ok to have ballooning in/out >>>>>> code for DMA buffers (allocated with dma_alloc_xxx) not in the >>>>>> balloon >>>>>> driver) >>>>> I think in the end this really depends on how the complete solution >>>>> will look like. gntdev is a special wrapper for the gnttab driver. >>>>> In case the new dma-buf driver needs to use parts of gntdev I'd rather >>>>> have a new driver above gnttab ("gntuser"?) used by gntdev and >>>>> dma-buf. >>>> The new driver doesn't use gntdev's existing API, but extends it, >>>> e.g. by adding new ways to export/import grefs for a dma-buf and >>>> manage dma-buf's kernel ops. Thus, gntdev, which already provides >>>> UAPI, seems to be a good candidate for such an extension >>> So this would mean you need a modification of libgnttab, right? This is >>> something the Xen tools maintainers need to decide. In case they don't >>> object extending the gntdev driver would be the natural thing to do. >>> >> That should be fine. Most of libgnttab does is to wrap existing kernel >> interfaces and expose them sensibly to user space programs. If gnttab >> device is extended, libgnttab should be extended accordingly. If a new >> device is created, a new library should be added. Either way there will >> be new toolstack code involved, which is not a problem in general. > Great, so finally I see the following approach to have generic > dma-buf use-cases support for Xen (which can be used for many purposes, > e.g. GPU/DRM buffer sharing, V4L, hyper-dmabuf etc.): > > 1. Extend Linux gntdev driver to support 3 new IOCTLs discussed previously > 2. Extend libgnttab to provide UAPI for those - Linux only as dma-buf > is a Linux thing > 3. Extend kernel API of the Linux balloon driver to allow dma_alloc_xxx way > of memory allocations > > If the above looks ok, then I can start prototyping, so we can discuss > implementation details Fine for me. Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |