From: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@metux.net> To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@metux.net>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>, "Bartosz Golaszewski" <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, "Jason Wang" <jasowang@redhat.com>, "Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>, "Anton Vorontsov" <anton@enomsg.org>, "Colin Cross" <ccross@android.com>, "Tony Luck" <tony.luck@intel.com>, "Linux Doc Mailing List" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, "Vincent Guittot" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "Bill Mills" <bill.mills@linaro.org>, "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: gpio: add virtio-gpio guest driver Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:54:16 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <116f8135-4ddf-e8fc-6838-94093702ec3d@metux.net> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210617035901.kfzps6kg2emthjf4@vireshk-i7> On 17.06.21 05:59, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Okay, we figured out now that you _haven't_ subscribed to virtio lists > and so your stuff never landed in anyone's inbox. But you did send > something and didn't completely went away. Actually, I am subscribed in the list. We already had debates on it, including on your postings (but also other things). And the ascii version of the spec actually landed on the list last year, we had discussions about it there. I've just had the problem that my patches didn't go through, which is very strange, since I actually am on the list and other mails of mine went through all the time. I'm now suspecting it's triggered by some subtle difference between my regular mail clients and git send-email. > Since you started this all and still want to do it, I will take my > patches back and let you finish with what you started. I will help > review them. Thank you very much. Please don't me wrong, I really don't wanna any kind of power play, just wanna get an technically good solution. If there had been any mis- understandings at that point, I'm officially saying sorry here. Let's be friends. You mentioned you've been missing with my spec. Please come foreward and tell us what exactly you're missing and what your use cases are. Note that I've intentionally left off certain "more sophisticated" functionality we find on *some* gpio controllers, eg. per-line irq masking, pinmux settings for several reasons, e.g.: * those are only implemented by some hardware * often implemented in or at least need to be coordinated with other pieces of hw (e.g. in SoCs, pinmux is usually done in a separate device) * it shall be possible to support even the most simple devices and have the more sophisticated things totally optional. minium requirements for silicon implementations should be the lowest possible (IOW: minimal number of logic gates) >> You sound like a politician that tries to push an hidden agenda, >> made by some secret interest group in the back room, against the >> people - like "resistance is futile". > > :) Perhaps I've been a bit overreacting at that point. But: this is really that kind of talking we hear from politicians and corporate leaders since many years, whenever they wanna push something through that we the people don't want. Politicians use that as a social engineering tool for demotivating any resistance. Over heare in Germany this even had become a meme, and folks from CCC made a radio show about and named by that (the German word is "alternativlos" - in english: without any alternative). No idea about other countries, maybe it's a cultural issue, but over here, those kind of talking had become a red light. Of course, I never intended to accuse you of being one of these people. Sorry if there's been misunderstanding. Let's get back to your implementation: you've mentioned you're routing raw virtio traffic into userland, to some other process (outside VMMs like qemu) - how exactly are you doing that ? That could be interesting for completely different scenarios. For example, I'm currently exploring how to get VirGL running between separate processes running under the same kernel instance (fow now we only have the driver side inside VM and the device outside it), means driver and device are running as separate processes. The primary use case are containers that shall have really GPU generic drivers, not knowing anything about the actual hardware on the host. Currently, container workloads wanting to use a GPU need to have special drivers for exactly the HW the host happens to have. This makes generic, portable container images a tuff problem. I haven't digged deeply into the matter, but some virtio-tap transport could be an relatively easy (probably not the most efficient) way to solve this problem. In that scanario it would like this: * we have a "virgl server" (could be some X or wayland application, or completely own compositor) opens up the device-end of an "virtio-tap" transport and attaches its virtio-gpio device emulation on it. * "virtio-tap" now creates a driver-end, kernel probes an virtio-gpu instance on this (also leading to a new DRI device) * container runtime picks the new DRI device and maps it into the container(s) [ yet open question, whether one DRI device for many containers is enough ] * container application sees that virtio-gpu DRI device and speaks to it (mesa->virgl backend) * the "virgl-server" receives buffers and commands from via virtio and sends them to the host's GL or Gallium API. Once we're already there, we might think whether it could make sense putting virtio routing into kvm itself, instead of letting qemu catch page faults and virtual irqs. Yet have to see whether that's a good idea, but I can imagine some performance improvements here. --mtx -- --- Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu. --- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@metux.net> To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@metux.net>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>, "Bartosz Golaszewski" <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, "Jason Wang" <jasowang@redhat.com>, "Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>, "Anton Vorontsov" <anton@enomsg.org>, "Colin Cross" <ccross@android.com>, "Tony Luck" <tony.luck@intel.com>, "Linux Doc Mailing List" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, "Vincent Guittot" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "Bill Mills" <bill.mills@linaro.org>, "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: gpio: add virtio-gpio guest driver Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:54:16 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <116f8135-4ddf-e8fc-6838-94093702ec3d@metux.net> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210617035901.kfzps6kg2emthjf4@vireshk-i7> On 17.06.21 05:59, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Okay, we figured out now that you _haven't_ subscribed to virtio lists > and so your stuff never landed in anyone's inbox. But you did send > something and didn't completely went away. Actually, I am subscribed in the list. We already had debates on it, including on your postings (but also other things). And the ascii version of the spec actually landed on the list last year, we had discussions about it there. I've just had the problem that my patches didn't go through, which is very strange, since I actually am on the list and other mails of mine went through all the time. I'm now suspecting it's triggered by some subtle difference between my regular mail clients and git send-email. > Since you started this all and still want to do it, I will take my > patches back and let you finish with what you started. I will help > review them. Thank you very much. Please don't me wrong, I really don't wanna any kind of power play, just wanna get an technically good solution. If there had been any mis- understandings at that point, I'm officially saying sorry here. Let's be friends. You mentioned you've been missing with my spec. Please come foreward and tell us what exactly you're missing and what your use cases are. Note that I've intentionally left off certain "more sophisticated" functionality we find on *some* gpio controllers, eg. per-line irq masking, pinmux settings for several reasons, e.g.: * those are only implemented by some hardware * often implemented in or at least need to be coordinated with other pieces of hw (e.g. in SoCs, pinmux is usually done in a separate device) * it shall be possible to support even the most simple devices and have the more sophisticated things totally optional. minium requirements for silicon implementations should be the lowest possible (IOW: minimal number of logic gates) >> You sound like a politician that tries to push an hidden agenda, >> made by some secret interest group in the back room, against the >> people - like "resistance is futile". > > :) Perhaps I've been a bit overreacting at that point. But: this is really that kind of talking we hear from politicians and corporate leaders since many years, whenever they wanna push something through that we the people don't want. Politicians use that as a social engineering tool for demotivating any resistance. Over heare in Germany this even had become a meme, and folks from CCC made a radio show about and named by that (the German word is "alternativlos" - in english: without any alternative). No idea about other countries, maybe it's a cultural issue, but over here, those kind of talking had become a red light. Of course, I never intended to accuse you of being one of these people. Sorry if there's been misunderstanding. Let's get back to your implementation: you've mentioned you're routing raw virtio traffic into userland, to some other process (outside VMMs like qemu) - how exactly are you doing that ? That could be interesting for completely different scenarios. For example, I'm currently exploring how to get VirGL running between separate processes running under the same kernel instance (fow now we only have the driver side inside VM and the device outside it), means driver and device are running as separate processes. The primary use case are containers that shall have really GPU generic drivers, not knowing anything about the actual hardware on the host. Currently, container workloads wanting to use a GPU need to have special drivers for exactly the HW the host happens to have. This makes generic, portable container images a tuff problem. I haven't digged deeply into the matter, but some virtio-tap transport could be an relatively easy (probably not the most efficient) way to solve this problem. In that scanario it would like this: * we have a "virgl server" (could be some X or wayland application, or completely own compositor) opens up the device-end of an "virtio-tap" transport and attaches its virtio-gpio device emulation on it. * "virtio-tap" now creates a driver-end, kernel probes an virtio-gpu instance on this (also leading to a new DRI device) * container runtime picks the new DRI device and maps it into the container(s) [ yet open question, whether one DRI device for many containers is enough ] * container application sees that virtio-gpu DRI device and speaks to it (mesa->virgl backend) * the "virgl-server" receives buffers and commands from via virtio and sends them to the host's GL or Gallium API. Once we're already there, we might think whether it could make sense putting virtio routing into kvm itself, instead of letting qemu catch page faults and virtual irqs. Yet have to see whether that's a good idea, but I can imagine some performance improvements here. --mtx -- --- Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu. --- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-17 9:54 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-06-15 17:49 [PATCH] drivers: gpio: add virtio-gpio guest driver Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-15 17:49 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 8:31 ` Linus Walleij 2021-06-16 8:31 ` Linus Walleij 2021-06-16 8:31 ` Linus Walleij 2021-06-16 11:49 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-16 11:49 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-16 11:49 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-16 15:04 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 15:04 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-17 3:59 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-17 3:59 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-17 3:59 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-17 9:54 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult [this message] 2021-06-17 9:54 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-17 11:47 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-17 11:47 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-17 11:47 ` Viresh Kumar 2021-06-16 14:41 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 14:41 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 18:47 ` banned on virtio list ? [Re: [PATCH] drivers: gpio: add virtio-gpio guest driver] Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 18:47 ` [virtio-dev] " Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 18:47 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-16 21:18 ` [virtio-dev] " Chet Ensign 2021-06-16 21:18 ` Chet Ensign -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2020-11-27 18:30 [PATCH] drivers: gpio: add virtio-gpio guest driver Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-11-27 18:30 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-11-27 18:45 ` Randy Dunlap 2020-11-27 18:45 ` Randy Dunlap 2020-11-27 18:45 ` Randy Dunlap 2020-12-03 19:01 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-03 19:01 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-11-27 19:33 ` kernel test robot 2020-11-27 19:33 ` kernel test robot 2020-11-27 19:33 ` kernel test robot 2020-11-27 19:33 ` kernel test robot 2020-11-29 20:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2020-11-29 20:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2020-11-29 20:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2020-11-29 22:10 ` Jonathan Neuschäfer 2020-11-29 22:10 ` Jonathan Neuschäfer 2020-11-29 22:10 ` Jonathan Neuschäfer 2020-12-03 19:12 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-03 19:12 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-02 14:15 ` Bartosz Golaszewski 2020-12-02 14:15 ` Bartosz Golaszewski 2020-12-03 19:00 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-03 19:00 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-03 22:35 ` Michael Walle 2020-12-03 22:35 ` Michael Walle 2020-12-04 8:28 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-04 8:28 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2020-12-04 9:06 ` Michael Walle 2020-12-04 9:06 ` Michael Walle
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=116f8135-4ddf-e8fc-6838-94093702ec3d@metux.net \ --to=lkml@metux.net \ --cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \ --cc=anton@enomsg.org \ --cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \ --cc=bill.mills@linaro.org \ --cc=ccross@android.com \ --cc=corbet@lwn.net \ --cc=info@metux.net \ --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \ --cc=keescook@chromium.org \ --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \ --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=mst@redhat.com \ --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \ --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \ --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.