Received: by 2002:a6b:500f:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id e15csp771842iob; Thu, 12 May 2022 04:27:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzkB/F+ue3s1b78CoflGc405k16py8FTDRb1ZLAcUMiaxMysTVaUkK3Eai+YF7CniwcnfRL X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:502:b0:1d9:a907:d845 with SMTP id r2-20020a17090b050200b001d9a907d845mr10408253pjz.162.1652354876317; Thu, 12 May 2022 04:27:56 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1652354876; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NS7sc2DllGXDqjaeijjgEsLCZfNcxV2lb2Di4ErV5UjPWDsWbI3P2xWq3vyAFN8KM8 JEndvc8MmdCJGRhRGu7yj+gf1n3dnI4Raqt7G5QLsxx+YFPlPyJZKhz1MFbDZRih++aj FQWzoP22p7upx70X/1PdstJLcjs/V3xBkmeVcbLm7pPSQ42MGzDNEipNcHYTaPHH04Q+ MgAfjBI59AwPfXVEtufRgwzYmxZHc2HcOKZCZnuYZ6eBpofruBAQ+xyhuteInq+bpw0z W+EH0tjmwqB0eaLrWC9bnz6mk+zigoHczGqT+Zqxb2XeHDzapIRKtUjfGqETY4NyDp21 lMRw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:cc :references:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:dkim-signature; bh=xuAzbqysKuhVB4T2w+Cq0krXLhTVBFkOGmRI2QVogJY=; b=E/eQy09vIA1eZ7fDKHn0dMjjNnjO5oFlGaTBMZ5tVo8xzsGopREobY9B4srZRXQrng UsrbZE891RcUm2Bavc5+CiFYy2RJypMebp1fkiAe/tmo0XwapJUDLE7ie5rKtHQPEqsf bwq4Ryq4UuZzewrPzVWM2jI0nvDUUFsDnIddyl291eceM0LN0pykA3WURdD/VEOquJor snOrO0bljO92mTdAkUAfq725RzUbtrqCBDKzbPvjWmztbhlTWRi2WdEIo0VOc0l1xKVx mvOPhKwCzdSPIlKlqGtt9miguxItuqMB8gMcEF9J8lExq39cjW37mtygGBI98lCwFQYh VkEA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@collabora.com header.s=mail header.b=bOXGXH5M; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=collabora.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f1-20020a170902ce8100b0015eaa840a13si6872248plg.224.2022.05.12.04.27.41; Thu, 12 May 2022 04:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@collabora.com header.s=mail header.b=bOXGXH5M; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=collabora.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1343857AbiEKPko (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 11 May 2022 11:40:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45424 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241912AbiEKPkl (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2022 11:40:41 -0400 Received: from bhuna.collabora.co.uk (bhuna.collabora.co.uk [46.235.227.227]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26A89986DD for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 08:40:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: dmitry.osipenko) with ESMTPSA id 2FC621F44F23 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1652283637; bh=hw+IbRtV4FDEikHLzTfTUBZrISD/nOB98xNZrs4QRyU=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:Cc:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=bOXGXH5Mof/WN809Do+90df/7EsRUz5UB5E35+9u83eFqG0MQeydSNOnI7H+r03KZ 4oVD332NsucFenhT1sS6y5JMjYELDs9UgVxKnVmZK48ruUgMF7DdZW5C394j0xPJWs H3lSh6y4irWJrPQCqxe/O+OUDmKhgc7hACpJR5OTu45f5T4U+RXKVSDRkEiLIcp6+z U296UcsrcLjO82fctzxbTy6+KtIbdo2D5yMpOS6sbAu3Ml0B9pt/6iic6YINhbZUTe EhLDNn85LhpwlO62kNVb5dLRDOUX37sFuy4SAgBB5BL2cVEYYu7qHp+7WOBC9Q5nT3 xObows7KOfk5Q== Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 18:40:32 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/15] drm/shmem-helper: Take reservation lock instead of drm_gem_shmem locks Content-Language: en-US To: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=c3=b6nig?= , Thomas Zimmermann , Daniel Vetter References: <8f932ab0-bb72-8fea-4078-dc59e9164bd4@collabora.com> <01506516-ab2f-cb6e-7507-f2a3295efb59@collabora.com> <83e68918-68de-c0c6-6f9b-e94d34b19383@collabora.com> <4d08b382-0076-1ea2-b565-893d50b453cb@collabora.com> <56787b70-fb64-64da-6006-d3aa3ed59d12@gmail.com> <3a362c32-870c-1d73-bba6-bbdcd62dc326@collabora.com> Cc: Daniel Stone , David Airlie , Gerd Hoffmann , Gurchetan Singh , Chia-I Wu , Daniel Almeida , Gert Wollny , Gustavo Padovan , Tomeu Vizoso , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Rob Herring , Steven Price , Alyssa Rosenzweig , Rob Clark , Emil Velikov , Robin Murphy , Dmitry Osipenko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org From: Dmitry Osipenko In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/11/22 18:29, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 06:14:00PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> On 5/11/22 17:24, Christian König wrote: >>> Am 11.05.22 um 15:00 schrieb Daniel Vetter: >>>> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 04:39:53PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>> [SNIP] >>>>> Since vmapping implies implicit pinning, we can't use a separate lock in >>>>> drm_gem_shmem_vmap() because we need to protect the >>>>> drm_gem_shmem_get_pages(), which is invoked by drm_gem_shmem_vmap() to >>>>> pin the pages and requires the dma_resv_lock to be locked. >>>>> >>>>> Hence the problem is: >>>>> >>>>> 1. If dma-buf importer holds the dma_resv_lock and invokes >>>>> dma_buf_vmap() -> drm_gem_shmem_vmap(), then drm_gem_shmem_vmap() shall >>>>> not take the dma_resv_lock. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Since dma-buf locking convention isn't specified, we can't assume >>>>> that dma-buf importer holds the dma_resv_lock around dma_buf_vmap(). >>>>> >>>>> The possible solutions are: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Specify the dma_resv_lock convention for dma-bufs and make all >>>>> drivers to follow it. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Make only DRM drivers to hold dma_resv_lock around dma_buf_vmap(). >>>>> Other non-DRM drivers will get the lockdep warning. >>>>> >>>>> 3. Make drm_gem_shmem_vmap() to take the dma_resv_lock and get deadlock >>>>> if dma-buf importer holds the lock. >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>> Yeah this is all very annoying. >>> Ah, yes that topic again :) >>> >>> I think we could relatively easily fix that by just defining and >>> enforcing that the dma_resv_lock must have be taken by the caller when >>> dma_buf_vmap() is called. >>> >>> A two step approach should work: >>> 1. Move the call to dma_resv_lock() into the dma_buf_vmap() function and >>> remove all lock taking from the vmap callback implementations. >>> 2. Move the call to dma_resv_lock() into the callers of dma_buf_vmap() >>> and enforce that the function is called with the lock held. >> I've doubts about the need to move out the dma_resv_lock() into the >> callers of dma_buf_vmap().. >> >> I looked through all the dma_buf_vmap() users and neither of them >> interacts with dma_resv_lock() at all, i.e. nobody takes the lock >> in/outside of dma_buf_vmap(). Hence it's easy and more practical to make >> dma_buf_mmap/vmap() to take the dma_resv_lock by themselves. > i915_gem_dmabuf_vmap -> i915_gem_object_pin_map_unlocked -> > i915_gem_object_lock -> dma_resv_lock > > And all the ttm drivers should work similarly. So there's definitely > drivers which grab dma_resv_lock from their vmap callback. Grr.. I'll take another look. >> It's unclear to me which driver may ever want to do the mapping under >> the dma_resv_lock. But if we will ever have such a driver that will need >> to map imported buffer under dma_resv_lock, then we could always add the >> dma_buf_vmap_locked() variant of the function. In this case the locking >> rule will sound like this: >> >> "All dma-buf importers are responsible for holding the dma-reservation >> lock around the dmabuf->ops->mmap/vmap() calls." Are you okay with this rule? >>> It shouldn't be that hard to clean up. The last time I looked into it my >>> main problem was that we didn't had any easy unit test for it. >> Do we have any tests for dma-bufs at all? It's unclear to me what you >> are going to test in regards to the reservation locks, could you please >> clarify? > Unfortunately not really :-/ Only way really is to grab a driver which > needs vmap (those are mostly display drivers) on an imported buffer, and > see what happens. > > 2nd best is liberally sprinkling lockdep annotations all over the place > and throwing it at intel ci (not sure amd ci is accessible to the public) > and then hoping that's good enough. Stuff like might_lock and > dma_resv_assert_held. Alright -- Best regards, Dmitry