Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181129140315.28476-1-vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org>
 <20181129141429.GA22638@lst.de> <CAF6AEGvsFbXGkC+=4oq1xXnoC2EVX2J0k-GqShefcek1=uw4Lw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKMK7uHOKtX2a12itSA0sDg=b77F+0vnLAdEvc_aNGRJTh85=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181129155758.GC26537@lst.de> <20181129162807.GL21184@phenom.ffwll.local>
 <20181129165715.GA27786@lst.de> <CAKMK7uECLeTbEjG6=unWZSKakpiYkmBVbCEKKY2xv=vVjF-pBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAFQd5A-Bh711VaNWhRJqcrofkBVCMFcNgqfztoyWJcUdhSu0Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAFQd5A-Bh711VaNWhRJqcrofkBVCMFcNgqfztoyWJcUdhSu0Q@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Nov 2018 13:57:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF6AEGsT9RO2RmgBTa0HQRjRUiRKy9N3vQxvD7RVWp4HpnWn+w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] drm: msm: Replace dma_map_sg with dma_sync_sg*
To:     Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, hch@lst.de,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>,
        Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org>,
        freedreno <freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:24 PM Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> [CC Marek]
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:09 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 5:57 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that one thing I'd like to avoid is exposing these funtions directly
> > > to drivers, as that will get us into all kinds of abuses.
> >
> > What kind of abuse do you expect? It could very well be that gpu folks
> > call that "standard use case" ... At least on x86 with the i915 driver
> > we pretty much rely on architectural guarantees for how cache flushes
> > work very much. Down to userspace doing the cache flushing for
> > mappings the kernel has set up.
>
> i915 is a very specific case of a fully contained,
> architecture-specific hardware subsystem, where you can just hardcode
> all integration details inside the driver, because nobody else would
> care.
>
> In ARM world, you can have the same IP blocks licensed by multiple SoC
> vendors with different integration details and that often includes the
> option of coherency.

fwiw, I believe all the GPU IP blocks that are used across multiple
SoCs have their own GPU MMU (potentially in addition to an iommu?).
So the dma-api is a much better fit for them..  drm/msm is a lot
closer to drm/i915 scenario, so I don't so much care if the solution
to our unique problem isn't something that would work for other
drivers ;-)

BR,
-R