[PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Jason Ekstrand]

libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
for X11 has always used execbuffer2.

Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
---
 .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c    | 100 ------------------
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h    |   2 -
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c               |   2 +-
 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 103 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index fe170186dd428..99772f37bff60 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -3394,106 +3394,6 @@ static bool check_buffer_count(size_t count)
 	return !(count < 1 || count > INT_MAX || count > SIZE_MAX / sz - 1);
 }
 
-/*
- * Legacy execbuffer just creates an exec2 list from the original exec object
- * list array and passes it to the real function.
- */
-int
-i915_gem_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
-			  struct drm_file *file)
-{
-	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(dev);
-	struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer *args = data;
-	struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 exec2;
-	struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object *exec_list = NULL;
-	struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *exec2_list = NULL;
-	const size_t count = args->buffer_count;
-	unsigned int i;
-	int err;
-
-	if (!check_buffer_count(count)) {
-		drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "execbuf2 with %zd buffers\n", count);
-		return -EINVAL;
-	}
-
-	exec2.buffers_ptr = args->buffers_ptr;
-	exec2.buffer_count = args->buffer_count;
-	exec2.batch_start_offset = args->batch_start_offset;
-	exec2.batch_len = args->batch_len;
-	exec2.DR1 = args->DR1;
-	exec2.DR4 = args->DR4;
-	exec2.num_cliprects = args->num_cliprects;
-	exec2.cliprects_ptr = args->cliprects_ptr;
-	exec2.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER;
-	i915_execbuffer2_set_context_id(exec2, 0);
-
-	err = i915_gem_check_execbuffer(&exec2);
-	if (err)
-		return err;
-
-	/* Copy in the exec list from userland */
-	exec_list = kvmalloc_array(count, sizeof(*exec_list),
-				   __GFP_NOWARN | GFP_KERNEL);
-
-	/* Allocate extra slots for use by the command parser */
-	exec2_list = kvmalloc_array(count + 2, eb_element_size(),
-				    __GFP_NOWARN | GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (exec_list == NULL || exec2_list == NULL) {
-		drm_dbg(&i915->drm,
-			"Failed to allocate exec list for %d buffers\n",
-			args->buffer_count);
-		kvfree(exec_list);
-		kvfree(exec2_list);
-		return -ENOMEM;
-	}
-	err = copy_from_user(exec_list,
-			     u64_to_user_ptr(args->buffers_ptr),
-			     sizeof(*exec_list) * count);
-	if (err) {
-		drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "copy %d exec entries failed %d\n",
-			args->buffer_count, err);
-		kvfree(exec_list);
-		kvfree(exec2_list);
-		return -EFAULT;
-	}
-
-	for (i = 0; i < args->buffer_count; i++) {
-		exec2_list[i].handle = exec_list[i].handle;
-		exec2_list[i].relocation_count = exec_list[i].relocation_count;
-		exec2_list[i].relocs_ptr = exec_list[i].relocs_ptr;
-		exec2_list[i].alignment = exec_list[i].alignment;
-		exec2_list[i].offset = exec_list[i].offset;
-		if (INTEL_GEN(to_i915(dev)) < 4)
-			exec2_list[i].flags = EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_FENCE;
-		else
-			exec2_list[i].flags = 0;
-	}
-
-	err = i915_gem_do_execbuffer(dev, file, &exec2, exec2_list);
-	if (exec2.flags & __EXEC_HAS_RELOC) {
-		struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object __user *user_exec_list =
-			u64_to_user_ptr(args->buffers_ptr);
-
-		/* Copy the new buffer offsets back to the user's exec list. */
-		for (i = 0; i < args->buffer_count; i++) {
-			if (!(exec2_list[i].offset & UPDATE))
-				continue;
-
-			exec2_list[i].offset =
-				gen8_canonical_addr(exec2_list[i].offset & PIN_OFFSET_MASK);
-			exec2_list[i].offset &= PIN_OFFSET_MASK;
-			if (__copy_to_user(&user_exec_list[i].offset,
-					   &exec2_list[i].offset,
-					   sizeof(user_exec_list[i].offset)))
-				break;
-		}
-	}
-
-	kvfree(exec_list);
-	kvfree(exec2_list);
-	return err;
-}
-
 int
 i915_gem_execbuffer2_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 			   struct drm_file *file)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h
index 87d8b27f426de..7fd22f3efbef0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h
@@ -14,8 +14,6 @@ int i915_gem_busy_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 			struct drm_file *file);
 int i915_gem_create_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 			  struct drm_file *file);
-int i915_gem_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
-			      struct drm_file *file);
 int i915_gem_execbuffer2_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 			       struct drm_file *file);
 int i915_gem_get_aperture_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
index 3edd5e47ad682..64edcab59fe12 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c
@@ -1701,7 +1701,7 @@ static const struct drm_ioctl_desc i915_ioctls[] = {
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_VBLANK_SWAP, drm_noop, DRM_AUTH),
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_HWS_ADDR, drm_noop, DRM_AUTH|DRM_MASTER|DRM_ROOT_ONLY),
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_INIT, drm_noop, DRM_AUTH|DRM_MASTER|DRM_ROOT_ONLY),
-	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER, i915_gem_execbuffer_ioctl, DRM_AUTH),
+	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER, drm_invalid_op, DRM_AUTH),
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2_WR, i915_gem_execbuffer2_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_PIN, i915_gem_reject_pin_ioctl, DRM_AUTH|DRM_ROOT_ONLY),
 	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_UNPIN, i915_gem_reject_pin_ioctl, DRM_AUTH|DRM_ROOT_ONLY),
-- 
2.29.2

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Keith Packard]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 653 bytes --]

Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> writes:

> libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
> when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
> which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
> both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
> for X11 has always used execbuffer2.

All execbuffer users in the past that I'm aware of used libdrm, which
now uses the execbuffer2 ioctl for this API. That means these
applications will remain ABI compatible through this change.

Acked-by: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>

-- 
-keith

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Dave Airlie]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 08:04, Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> wrote:
>
> Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> writes:
>
> > libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
> > when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
> > which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
> > both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
> > for X11 has always used execbuffer2.
>
> All execbuffer users in the past that I'm aware of used libdrm, which
> now uses the execbuffer2 ioctl for this API. That means these
> applications will remain ABI compatible through this change.
>
> Acked-by: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com>

Acked-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>

Dave.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Dixit, Ashutosh]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:00:49 -0800, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
> libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
> when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
> which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
> both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
> for X11 has always used execbuffer2.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> ---
>  .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c    | 100 ------------------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h    |   2 -
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c               |   2 +-
>  3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 103 deletions(-)

Don't we want to clean up references to legacy execbuffer in
include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h too?
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Jason Ekstrand]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 996 bytes --]


On March 11, 2021 20:26:06 "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:00:49 -0800, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>>
>> libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
>> when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
>> which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
>> both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
>> for X11 has always used execbuffer2.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
>> ---
>> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c    | 100 ------------------
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h    |   2 -
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c               |   2 +-
>> 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 103 deletions(-)
>
> Don't we want to clean up references to legacy execbuffer in
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h too?

I thought about that but Daniel said we should leave them. Maybe a comment 
is in order?

--Jason


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2165 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Dixit, Ashutosh]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 20:31:33 -0800, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On March 11, 2021 20:26:06 "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> wrote:
>  On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:00:49 -0800, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
>  libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
>  when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
>  which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
>  both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
>  for X11 has always used execbuffer2.
>
>  Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
>  ---
>  .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c    | 100 ------------------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h    |   2 -
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c               |   2 +-
>  3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 103 deletions(-)
>
>  Don't we want to clean up references to legacy execbuffer in
>  include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h too?
>
> I thought about that but Daniel said we should leave them. Maybe a
> comment is in order?

No, should be ok since we are using drm_invalid_op(). If we want to delete
the unused 'struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer' we can do that by converting
from DRM_IOW to DRM_IO in the DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER #define.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] i915: Drop legacy execbuffer support

[Daniel Vetter]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:31:33PM -0600, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> 
> On March 11, 2021 20:26:06 "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:00:49 -0800, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > > 
> > > libdrm has supported the newer execbuffer2 ioctl and using it by default
> > > when it exists since libdrm commit b50964027bef249a0cc3d511de05c2464e0a1e22
> > > which landed Mar 2, 2010.  The i915 and i965 drivers in Mesa at the time
> > > both used libdrm and so did the Intel X11 back-end.  The SNA back-end
> > > for X11 has always used execbuffer2.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> > > ---
> > > .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c    | 100 ------------------
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ioctls.h    |   2 -
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c               |   2 +-
> > > 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 103 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Don't we want to clean up references to legacy execbuffer in
> > include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h too?
> 
> I thought about that but Daniel said we should leave them. Maybe a comment
> is in order?

These headers are copied unchanged to userspace for building. We don't use
kernel-headers packages directly in any of our userspace (I hope at
least), but still better safe than sorry and avoid compilation failures
simply due to updated uapi headers that lost a few old things.

Also we need at least the struct size because that's encoded in the ioctl
number, and at that point might as well keep the entire thing.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel