* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:15 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation Matthew Auld
@ 2021-07-15 10:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-15 11:07 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-15 11:09 ` Matthew Auld
2021-07-16 14:36 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 2 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2021-07-15 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Auld, intel-gfx
Cc: Thomas Hellström, dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke,
Daniel Vetter
On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>
> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> been requested.
>
> v2:
> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> - add some kernel-doc.
1)
I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What
probes successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage
time. So if the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at
a later stage?
Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time.
But again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
documented.
2)
I am also not a fan of getparam for individual ioctl flags since I don't
think it scales nicely. How about add a param which returns all
supported flags like I915_PARAM_USERPTR_SUPPORTED_FLAGS?
Downside is it only works for 32-bit flag fields with getparam. Or it
could be a query to solve that as well.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>
> #endif
>
> +static int
> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> +{
> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + int ret = -EFAULT;
> +
> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + addr = vma->vm_end;
> + }
> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> * context - user memory.
> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> }
>
> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> + /*
> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> + */
> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> if (obj == NULL)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> break;
> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + value = true;
> + break;
> default:
> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> return -EINVAL;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> */
> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>
> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> +
> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>
> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> * returned.
> *
> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + *
> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> + * should complain.
> + *
> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> + *
> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> + *
> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> + * returns a non-zero value.
> + *
> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> *
> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> */
> __u32 flags;
> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> /**
> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2021-07-15 11:07 ` Daniel Vetter
2021-07-15 11:27 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-15 11:09 ` Matthew Auld
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2021-07-15 11:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel, Chris Wilson,
Kenneth Graunke, Matthew Auld, Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:33:10AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >
> > Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> > to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> > upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> > using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> > we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> > backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> > VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> >
> > With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> > way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> > been requested.
> >
> > v2:
> > - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> > check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> > - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> > - add some kernel-doc.
>
> 1)
>
> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What probes
> successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage time. So if
> the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at a later stage?
>
> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time. But
> again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
> documented.
Populate is exactly as racy as probe. We don't support pinned userptr
anymore.
> 2)
>
> I am also not a fan of getparam for individual ioctl flags since I don't
> think it scales nicely. How about add a param which returns all supported
> flags like I915_PARAM_USERPTR_SUPPORTED_FLAGS?
>
> Downside is it only works for 32-bit flag fields with getparam. Or it could
> be a query to solve that as well.
I expect the actual userspace code will simply try with the probe flag
first, and then without + set_domain. So strictly speaking we might not
even have a need for the getparam.
Otoh, let's not overthink/engineer this, whatever works for userspace is
ok imo. A new query that lists all flags is the kind of fake-generic stuff
that will like mis-estimate where the future actually lands, e.g. how do
you encode if we add extensions to userptr to this? Which is something we
absolutely can, by extending the struct at the end, which doesn't even
need a new flag.
Let's solve the immediate problem at hand, and not try to guess what more
problems we might have in the future.
-Daniel
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
>
> > Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> > Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> > include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
> > #endif
> > +static int
> > +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> > +{
> > + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > + int ret = -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> > + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> > + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> > + ret = 0;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + addr = vma->vm_end;
> > + }
> > + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> > * context - user memory.
> > @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > }
> > if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> > - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> > + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> > + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> > return -EINVAL;
> > if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> > @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > return -ENODEV;
> > }
> > + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> > + /*
> > + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> > + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> > + */
> > + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> > obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> > if (obj == NULL)
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> > value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> > break;
> > + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > + value = true;
> > + break;
> > default:
> > DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> > return -EINVAL;
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> > */
> > #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
> > +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> > +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> > +
> > /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
> > typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> > @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> > * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> > * returned.
> > *
> > + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > + *
> > + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> > + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> > + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> > + * should complain.
> > + *
> > + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> > + *
> > + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> > + *
> > + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> > + * returns a non-zero value.
> > + *
> > * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> > *
> > * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> > */
> > __u32 flags;
> > #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> > +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> > #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> > /**
> > * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
> >
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 11:07 ` Daniel Vetter
@ 2021-07-15 11:27 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-15 18:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2021-07-15 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Vetter
Cc: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel, Chris Wilson,
Kenneth Graunke, Matthew Auld, Daniel Vetter
On 15/07/2021 12:07, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:33:10AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
>>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>
>>> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
>>> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
>>> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
>>> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
>>> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
>>> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
>>> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>>>
>>> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
>>> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
>>> been requested.
>>>
>>> v2:
>>> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
>>> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
>>> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
>>> - add some kernel-doc.
>>
>> 1)
>>
>> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What probes
>> successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage time. So if
>> the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at a later stage?
>>
>> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time. But
>> again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
>> documented.
>
> Populate is exactly as racy as probe. We don't support pinned userptr
> anymore.
Yes, wrote so myself - "..again with no guarantees they are still there
at use time..".
Perhaps I don't understand what problem is probe supposed to solve. It
doesn't deal 1:1 with set_domain removal since that one actually did
get_pages so that would be populate. But fact remains regardless that if
userspace is given a pointer it doesn't trust, _and_ wants the check it
for this reason or that, then probe solves nothing. Unless there is
actually at minimum some protocol to reply to whoever sent the pointer
like "not that pointer please".
>> 2)
>>
>> I am also not a fan of getparam for individual ioctl flags since I don't
>> think it scales nicely. How about add a param which returns all supported
>> flags like I915_PARAM_USERPTR_SUPPORTED_FLAGS?
>>
>> Downside is it only works for 32-bit flag fields with getparam. Or it could
>> be a query to solve that as well.
>
> I expect the actual userspace code will simply try with the probe flag
> first, and then without + set_domain. So strictly speaking we might not
> even have a need for the getparam.
>
> Otoh, let's not overthink/engineer this, whatever works for userspace is
> ok imo. A new query that lists all flags is the kind of fake-generic stuff
> that will like mis-estimate where the future actually lands, e.g. how do
> you encode if we add extensions to userptr to this? Which is something we
> absolutely can, by extending the struct at the end, which doesn't even
> need a new flag.
>
> Let's solve the immediate problem at hand, and not try to guess what more
> problems we might have in the future.
Yeah I am guessing if anyone is using some of the other userptr flags
they don't have a getparam for that either. At least that would be
consolidated with I915_PARAM_USERPTR_SUPPORTED_FLAGS. There is no
requirement that getparam needs to keep supporting future extensions to
the struct itself, equally as I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE is directly
tied to the same flags field, only a subset of it.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> -Daniel
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tvrtko
>>
>>> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
>>> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
>>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
>>> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
>>> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
>>> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
>>> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
>>> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>>> #endif
>>> +static int
>>> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
>>> +{
>>> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>>> + int ret = -EFAULT;
>>> +
>>> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
>>> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
>>> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
>>> + ret = 0;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + addr = vma->vm_end;
>>> + }
>>> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
>>> * context - user memory.
>>> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>> }
>>> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
>>> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
>>> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
>>> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
>>> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>> return -ENODEV;
>>> }
>>> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
>>> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
>>> + */
>>> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
>>> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
>>> if (obj == NULL)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
>>> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
>>> break;
>>> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
>>> + value = true;
>>> + break;
>>> default:
>>> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
>>> */
>>> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>>> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
>>> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
>>> +
>>> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>>> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
>>> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
>>> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
>>> * returned.
>>> *
>>> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
>>> + *
>>> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
>>> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
>>> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
>>> + * should complain.
>>> + *
>>> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
>>> + *
>>> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
>>> + *
>>> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
>>> + * returns a non-zero value.
>>> + *
>>> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
>>> *
>>> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
>>> */
>>> __u32 flags;
>>> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
>>> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
>>> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
>>> /**
>>> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
>>>
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 11:27 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2021-07-15 18:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
2021-07-15 19:18 ` Jason Ekstrand
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Kenneth Graunke @ 2021-07-15 18:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Vetter, Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel, Chris Wilson,
Matthew Auld, Daniel Vetter
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2943 bytes --]
On Thursday, July 15, 2021 4:27:44 AM PDT Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 15/07/2021 12:07, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:33:10AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >>
> >> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> >>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >>>
> >>> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> >>> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> >>> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> >>> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> >>> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> >>> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> >>> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> >>>
> >>> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> >>> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> >>> been requested.
> >>>
> >>> v2:
> >>> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> >>> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> >>> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> >>> - add some kernel-doc.
> >>
> >> 1)
> >>
> >> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What probes
> >> successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage time. So if
> >> the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at a later stage?
> >>
> >> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time. But
> >> again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
> >> documented.
> >
> > Populate is exactly as racy as probe. We don't support pinned userptr
> > anymore.
>
> Yes, wrote so myself - "..again with no guarantees they are still there
> at use time..".
>
> Perhaps I don't understand what problem is probe supposed to solve. It
> doesn't deal 1:1 with set_domain removal since that one actually did
> get_pages so that would be populate. But fact remains regardless that if
> userspace is given a pointer it doesn't trust, _and_ wants the check it
> for this reason or that, then probe solves nothing. Unless there is
> actually at minimum some protocol to reply to whoever sent the pointer
> like "not that pointer please".
That's exactly the point. GL_AMD_pinned_memory requires us the OpenGL
implementation to return an error for "not that pointer, please", at the
time when said pointer is supplied - not at first use.
Sure, there can be reasons why it might seem fine up front, and not work
later. But an early check of "just no, you're doing it totally wrong"
at the right moment can be helpful for application developers. While it
shouldn't really happen, if it ever did, it would be a lot more obvious
to debug than "much later on, when something randomly flushed the GPU
commands we were building, something went wrong, and we don't know why."
--Ken
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 18:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
@ 2021-07-15 19:18 ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-07-16 8:20 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-16 14:50 ` Daniel Vetter
2 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jason Ekstrand @ 2021-07-15 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kenneth Graunke
Cc: Thomas Hellström, Intel GFX, Maling list - DRI developers,
Chris Wilson, Matthew Auld, Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 1:21 PM Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 15, 2021 4:27:44 AM PDT Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >
> > On 15/07/2021 12:07, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:33:10AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > >>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > >>>
> > >>> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> > >>> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> > >>> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> > >>> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> > >>> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> > >>> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> > >>> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> > >>>
> > >>> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> > >>> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> > >>> been requested.
> > >>>
> > >>> v2:
> > >>> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> > >>> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> > >>> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> > >>> - add some kernel-doc.
> > >>
> > >> 1)
> > >>
> > >> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What probes
> > >> successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage time. So if
> > >> the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at a later stage?
> > >>
> > >> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time. But
> > >> again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
> > >> documented.
> > >
> > > Populate is exactly as racy as probe. We don't support pinned userptr
> > > anymore.
> >
> > Yes, wrote so myself - "..again with no guarantees they are still there
> > at use time..".
> >
> > Perhaps I don't understand what problem is probe supposed to solve. It
> > doesn't deal 1:1 with set_domain removal since that one actually did
> > get_pages so that would be populate. But fact remains regardless that if
> > userspace is given a pointer it doesn't trust, _and_ wants the check it
> > for this reason or that, then probe solves nothing. Unless there is
> > actually at minimum some protocol to reply to whoever sent the pointer
> > like "not that pointer please".
>
> That's exactly the point. GL_AMD_pinned_memory requires us the OpenGL
> implementation to return an error for "not that pointer, please", at the
> time when said pointer is supplied - not at first use.
>
> Sure, there can be reasons why it might seem fine up front, and not work
> later. But an early check of "just no, you're doing it totally wrong"
> at the right moment can be helpful for application developers. While it
> shouldn't really happen, if it ever did, it would be a lot more obvious
> to debug than "much later on, when something randomly flushed the GPU
> commands we were building, something went wrong, and we don't know why."
And before someone chimes in saying that Vulkan doesn't need this
because we can just VK_ERROR_DEVICE_LOST later, that's not true. We'd
like to be able to return VK_ERROR_INVALID_EXTERNAL_HANDLE in the
easily checkable cases like if they try to pass in a mmapped file.
--Jason
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 18:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
2021-07-15 19:18 ` Jason Ekstrand
@ 2021-07-16 8:20 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-16 14:50 ` Daniel Vetter
2 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2021-07-16 8:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kenneth Graunke, Daniel Vetter
Cc: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel, Chris Wilson,
Matthew Auld, Daniel Vetter
On 15/07/2021 19:21, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On Thursday, July 15, 2021 4:27:44 AM PDT Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 15/07/2021 12:07, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:33:10AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
>>>>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
>>>>> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
>>>>> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
>>>>> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
>>>>> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
>>>>> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
>>>>> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>>>>>
>>>>> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
>>>>> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
>>>>> been requested.
>>>>>
>>>>> v2:
>>>>> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
>>>>> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
>>>>> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
>>>>> - add some kernel-doc.
>>>>
>>>> 1)
>>>>
>>>> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What probes
>>>> successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage time. So if
>>>> the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at a later stage?
>>>>
>>>> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time. But
>>>> again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
>>>> documented.
>>>
>>> Populate is exactly as racy as probe. We don't support pinned userptr
>>> anymore.
>>
>> Yes, wrote so myself - "..again with no guarantees they are still there
>> at use time..".
>>
>> Perhaps I don't understand what problem is probe supposed to solve. It
>> doesn't deal 1:1 with set_domain removal since that one actually did
>> get_pages so that would be populate. But fact remains regardless that if
>> userspace is given a pointer it doesn't trust, _and_ wants the check it
>> for this reason or that, then probe solves nothing. Unless there is
>> actually at minimum some protocol to reply to whoever sent the pointer
>> like "not that pointer please".
>
> That's exactly the point. GL_AMD_pinned_memory requires us the OpenGL
> implementation to return an error for "not that pointer, please", at the
> time when said pointer is supplied - not at first use.
>
> Sure, there can be reasons why it might seem fine up front, and not work
> later. But an early check of "just no, you're doing it totally wrong"
> at the right moment can be helpful for application developers. While it
> shouldn't really happen, if it ever did, it would be a lot more obvious
> to debug than "much later on, when something randomly flushed the GPU
> commands we were building, something went wrong, and we don't know why."
Ack, thanks for the clarification. For this limited use case I agree probe works.
Regards,
Tvrtko
P.S. I made a mistake (?) of looking at the GL_AMD_pinned_memory spec:
"""
3) Can the application free the memory?
RESOLVED: YES. However, the underlying buffer object should
have been deleted from the OpenGL to prevent any access by
the GPU, or the result is undefined, including program or even system
termination.
"""
Scary stuff that spec of userspace level API would allow such kernel bugs!
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 18:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
2021-07-15 19:18 ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-07-16 8:20 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2021-07-16 14:50 ` Daniel Vetter
2 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2021-07-16 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kenneth Graunke
Cc: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Matthew Auld
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:21 PM Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 15, 2021 4:27:44 AM PDT Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >
> > On 15/07/2021 12:07, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 11:33:10AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > >>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > >>>
> > >>> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> > >>> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> > >>> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> > >>> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> > >>> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> > >>> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> > >>> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> > >>>
> > >>> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> > >>> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> > >>> been requested.
> > >>>
> > >>> v2:
> > >>> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> > >>> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> > >>> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> > >>> - add some kernel-doc.
> > >>
> > >> 1)
> > >>
> > >> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What probes
> > >> successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage time. So if
> > >> the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at a later stage?
> > >>
> > >> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time. But
> > >> again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
> > >> documented.
> > >
> > > Populate is exactly as racy as probe. We don't support pinned userptr
> > > anymore.
> >
> > Yes, wrote so myself - "..again with no guarantees they are still there
> > at use time..".
> >
> > Perhaps I don't understand what problem is probe supposed to solve. It
> > doesn't deal 1:1 with set_domain removal since that one actually did
> > get_pages so that would be populate. But fact remains regardless that if
> > userspace is given a pointer it doesn't trust, _and_ wants the check it
> > for this reason or that, then probe solves nothing. Unless there is
> > actually at minimum some protocol to reply to whoever sent the pointer
> > like "not that pointer please".
>
> That's exactly the point. GL_AMD_pinned_memory requires us the OpenGL
> implementation to return an error for "not that pointer, please", at the
> time when said pointer is supplied - not at first use.
>
> Sure, there can be reasons why it might seem fine up front, and not work
> later. But an early check of "just no, you're doing it totally wrong"
> at the right moment can be helpful for application developers. While it
> shouldn't really happen, if it ever did, it would be a lot more obvious
> to debug than "much later on, when something randomly flushed the GPU
> commands we were building, something went wrong, and we don't know why."
Also, that extension doesn't make guarantees about importing nasty
userspace memory where some non-trusted entity could e.g. truncate()
the file and render all pages invalid, even if you're holding a
reference to it still.
It's purely to check "hey I got this random pointer here from
somewhere, I trust it, can you use it assuming I will not change
anything with hit?". Which is exactly what probe solves, and pulling
in the pages is kinda overkill.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-15 11:07 ` Daniel Vetter
@ 2021-07-15 11:09 ` Matthew Auld
2021-07-15 11:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Auld @ 2021-07-15 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Thomas Hellström, Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development,
ML dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke, Matthew Auld
On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 11:33, Tvrtko Ursulin
<tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >
> > Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> > to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> > upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> > using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> > we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> > backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> > VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> >
> > With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> > way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> > been requested.
> >
> > v2:
> > - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> > check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> > - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> > - add some kernel-doc.
>
> 1)
>
> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What
> probes successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage
> time. So if the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at
> a later stage?
>
> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time.
> But again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
> documented.
>
> 2)
>
> I am also not a fan of getparam for individual ioctl flags since I don't
> think it scales nicely. How about add a param which returns all
> supported flags like I915_PARAM_USERPTR_SUPPORTED_FLAGS?
>
> Downside is it only works for 32-bit flag fields with getparam. Or it
> could be a query to solve that as well.
I guess. You don't think it's a little iffy though, since there were
other flags which were added before this? So effectively userspace
queries SUPPORTED_FLAGS and might get -EINVAL on older kernels, even
though the flag is supported on that kernel(like READONLY)?
Maybe a versioning scheme instead? I915_PARAM_USERPTR_VERSION? Seems
quite common for other params.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
>
> > Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> > Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> > include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
> >
> > #endif
> >
> > +static int
> > +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> > +{
> > + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > + int ret = -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> > + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> > + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> > + ret = 0;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + addr = vma->vm_end;
> > + }
> > + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> > * context - user memory.
> > @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > }
> >
> > if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> > - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> > + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> > + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> > @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > return -ENODEV;
> > }
> >
> > + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> > + /*
> > + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> > + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> > + */
> > + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> > obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> > if (obj == NULL)
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> > value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> > break;
> > + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > + value = true;
> > + break;
> > default:
> > DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> > return -EINVAL;
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> > */
> > #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
> >
> > +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> > +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> > +
> > /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
> >
> > typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> > @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> > * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> > * returned.
> > *
> > + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > + *
> > + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> > + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> > + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> > + * should complain.
> > + *
> > + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> > + *
> > + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> > + *
> > + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> > + * returns a non-zero value.
> > + *
> > * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> > *
> > * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> > */
> > __u32 flags;
> > #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> > +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> > #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> > /**
> > * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 11:09 ` Matthew Auld
@ 2021-07-15 11:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2021-07-15 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Auld
Cc: Thomas Hellström, Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development,
ML dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke, Matthew Auld
On 15/07/2021 12:09, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 11:33, Tvrtko Ursulin
> <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
>>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>
>>> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
>>> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
>>> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
>>> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
>>> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
>>> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
>>> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>>>
>>> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
>>> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
>>> been requested.
>>>
>>> v2:
>>> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
>>> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
>>> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
>>> - add some kernel-doc.
>>
>> 1)
>>
>> I think probing is too weak to be offered as part of the uapi. What
>> probes successfully at create time might not be there anymore at usage
>> time. So if the pointer is not trusted at one point, why should it be at
>> a later stage?
>>
>> Only thing which works for me is populate (so get_pages) at create time.
>> But again with no guarantees they are still there at use time clearly
>> documented.
>>
>> 2)
>>
>> I am also not a fan of getparam for individual ioctl flags since I don't
>> think it scales nicely. How about add a param which returns all
>> supported flags like I915_PARAM_USERPTR_SUPPORTED_FLAGS?
>>
>> Downside is it only works for 32-bit flag fields with getparam. Or it
>> could be a query to solve that as well.
>
> I guess. You don't think it's a little iffy though, since there were
> other flags which were added before this? So effectively userspace
> queries SUPPORTED_FLAGS and might get -EINVAL on older kernels, even
> though the flag is supported on that kernel(like READONLY)?
For me it is probably passable since unsupported getparam fundamentally
doesn't imply unsupported features predating that getparam. Same as for
example unsupported engine query does not mean there are no engines. But
anyway, seems question will be resolved by Daniel so don't pay attention
to me.
Regards,
Tvrtko
>
> Maybe a versioning scheme instead? I915_PARAM_USERPTR_VERSION? Seems
> quite common for other params.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tvrtko
>>
>>> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
>>> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
>>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
>>> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
>>> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
>>> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
>>> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
>>> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>>>
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> +static int
>>> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
>>> +{
>>> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
>>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>>> + int ret = -EFAULT;
>>> +
>>> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
>>> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
>>> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
>>> + ret = 0;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + addr = vma->vm_end;
>>> + }
>>> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
>>> * context - user memory.
>>> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>> }
>>>
>>> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
>>> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
>>> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
>>> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
>>> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>> return -ENODEV;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
>>> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
>>> + */
>>> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
>>> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
>>> if (obj == NULL)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
>>> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
>>> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
>>> break;
>>> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
>>> + value = true;
>>> + break;
>>> default:
>>> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>>> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
>>> */
>>> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>>>
>>> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
>>> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
>>> +
>>> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>>>
>>> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
>>> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
>>> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
>>> * returned.
>>> *
>>> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
>>> + *
>>> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
>>> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
>>> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
>>> + * should complain.
>>> + *
>>> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
>>> + *
>>> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
>>> + *
>>> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
>>> + * returns a non-zero value.
>>> + *
>>> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
>>> *
>>> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
>>> */
>>> __u32 flags;
>>> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
>>> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
>>> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
>>> /**
>>> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Intel-gfx mailing list
>> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:15 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation Matthew Auld
2021-07-15 10:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2021-07-16 14:36 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-21 19:18 ` Kenneth Graunke
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2021-07-16 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Auld, intel-gfx
Cc: Thomas Hellström, dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke,
Daniel Vetter
On 15/07/2021 11:15, Matthew Auld wrote:
> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>
> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> been requested.
>
> v2:
> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
PROBE
> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> - add some kernel-doc.
>
> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>
> #endif
>
> +static int
> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> +{
> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + int ret = -EFAULT;
> +
> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + addr = vma->vm_end;
> + }
> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
Logic here looks good to me.
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> * context - user memory.
> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> }
>
> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> + /*
> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> + */
> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> if (obj == NULL)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> break;
> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + value = true;
> + break;
> default:
> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> return -EINVAL;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> */
> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>
> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> +
> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>
> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> * returned.
> *
> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + *
> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> + * should complain.
> + *
> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> + *
> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
I'd also add a note on how validation at create time may not mean object
will still be valid at use time.
With that added, and ignoring the question of whether to have setparam
or not:
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
> + *
> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> + * returns a non-zero value.
> + *
> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> *
> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> */
> __u32 flags;
> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> /**
> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:15 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation Matthew Auld
2021-07-15 10:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-07-16 14:36 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2021-07-21 19:18 ` Kenneth Graunke
2021-07-21 19:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
2021-07-21 20:27 ` Jason Ekstrand
4 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Kenneth Graunke @ 2021-07-21 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx, Matthew Auld
Cc: Thomas Hellström, dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Daniel Vetter
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6033 bytes --]
Thanks for this! Series is:
Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/kwg/mesa/-/commits/iris-userptr-probe
is an untested branch that uses the new probe API in Mesa.
On Thursday, July 15, 2021 3:15:35 AM PDT Matthew Auld wrote:
> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>
> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> been requested.
>
> v2:
> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> - add some kernel-doc.
>
> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>
> #endif
>
> +static int
> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> +{
> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + int ret = -EFAULT;
> +
> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + addr = vma->vm_end;
> + }
> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> * context - user memory.
> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> }
>
> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> + /*
> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> + */
> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> if (obj == NULL)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> break;
> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + value = true;
> + break;
> default:
> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> return -EINVAL;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> */
> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>
> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> +
> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>
> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> * returned.
> *
> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + *
> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> + * should complain.
> + *
> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> + *
> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> + *
> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> + * returns a non-zero value.
> + *
> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> *
> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> */
> __u32 flags;
> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> /**
> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:15 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation Matthew Auld
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-07-21 19:18 ` Kenneth Graunke
@ 2021-07-21 19:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
2021-07-21 20:27 ` Jason Ekstrand
4 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Kenneth Graunke @ 2021-07-21 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx, Matthew Auld
Cc: Thomas Hellström, dri-devel, Chris Wilson, Daniel Vetter
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6030 bytes --]
Thanks! Series is:
Acked-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/kwg/mesa/-/commits/iris-userptr-probe
is an untested Mesa branch that makes use of the new probe uAPI.
On Thursday, July 15, 2021 3:15:35 AM PDT Matthew Auld wrote:
> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>
> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> been requested.
>
> v2:
> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> - add some kernel-doc.
>
> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>
> #endif
>
> +static int
> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> +{
> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + int ret = -EFAULT;
> +
> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + addr = vma->vm_end;
> + }
> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> * context - user memory.
> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> }
>
> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> + /*
> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> + */
> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> if (obj == NULL)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> break;
> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + value = true;
> + break;
> default:
> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> return -EINVAL;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> */
> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>
> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> +
> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>
> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> * returned.
> *
> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + *
> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> + * should complain.
> + *
> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> + *
> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> + *
> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> + * returns a non-zero value.
> + *
> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> *
> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> */
> __u32 flags;
> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> /**
> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-15 10:15 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation Matthew Auld
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-07-21 19:21 ` Kenneth Graunke
@ 2021-07-21 20:27 ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-07-22 8:43 ` Matthew Auld
4 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jason Ekstrand @ 2021-07-21 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Auld
Cc: Thomas Hellström, Intel GFX, Maling list - DRI developers,
Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke, Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 5:16 AM Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
>
> With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> been requested.
>
> v2:
> - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> - add some kernel-doc.
>
> Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
>
> #endif
>
> +static int
> +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> +{
> + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + int ret = -EFAULT;
> +
> + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
Why isn't this > end? Are we somehow guaranteed that one vma covers
the entire range?
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> + break;
> +
> + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + addr = vma->vm_end;
> + }
> + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> * context - user memory.
> @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> }
>
> if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> + /*
> + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> + */
> + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> if (obj == NULL)
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> break;
> + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + value = true;
> + break;
> default:
> DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> return -EINVAL;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> */
> #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
>
> +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> +
> /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
>
> typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> * returned.
> *
> + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> + *
> + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> + * should complain.
> + *
> + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> + *
> + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> + *
> + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> + * returns a non-zero value.
> + *
> * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> *
> * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> */
> __u32 flags;
> #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> /**
> * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
> --
> 2.26.3
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-21 20:27 ` Jason Ekstrand
@ 2021-07-22 8:43 ` Matthew Auld
2021-07-22 13:29 ` Jason Ekstrand
0 siblings, 1 reply; 28+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Auld @ 2021-07-22 8:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Ekstrand
Cc: Thomas Hellström, Daniel Vetter, Intel GFX,
Maling list - DRI developers, Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke,
Matthew Auld
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 21:28, Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 5:16 AM Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >
> > Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> > to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> > upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> > using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> > we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> > backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> > VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> >
> > With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> > way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> > been requested.
> >
> > v2:
> > - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> > check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> > - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> > - add some kernel-doc.
> >
> > Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> > Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> > include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
> >
> > #endif
> >
> > +static int
> > +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> > +{
> > + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > + int ret = -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> > + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> > + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
>
> Why isn't this > end? Are we somehow guaranteed that one vma covers
> the entire range?
AFAIK we are just making sure we don't have a hole(note that we also
update addr below), for example the user might have done a partial
munmap. There could be multiple vma's if the kernel was unable to
merge them. If we reach the vm_end >= end, then we know we have a
"valid" range.
>
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> > + ret = 0;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + addr = vma->vm_end;
> > + }
> > + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> > * context - user memory.
> > @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > }
> >
> > if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> > - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> > + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> > + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> > @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > return -ENODEV;
> > }
> >
> > + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> > + /*
> > + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> > + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> > + */
> > + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> > obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> > if (obj == NULL)
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> > value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> > break;
> > + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > + value = true;
> > + break;
> > default:
> > DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> > return -EINVAL;
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> > */
> > #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
> >
> > +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> > +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> > +
> > /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
> >
> > typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> > @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> > * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> > * returned.
> > *
> > + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > + *
> > + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> > + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> > + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> > + * should complain.
> > + *
> > + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> > + *
> > + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> > + *
> > + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> > + * returns a non-zero value.
> > + *
> > * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> > *
> > * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> > */
> > __u32 flags;
> > #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> > +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> > #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> > /**
> > * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
> > --
> > 2.26.3
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/userptr: Probe existence of backing struct pages upon creation
2021-07-22 8:43 ` Matthew Auld
@ 2021-07-22 13:29 ` Jason Ekstrand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: Jason Ekstrand @ 2021-07-22 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Auld
Cc: Thomas Hellström, Daniel Vetter, Intel GFX,
Maling list - DRI developers, Chris Wilson, Kenneth Graunke,
Matthew Auld
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 3:44 AM Matthew Auld
<matthew.william.auld@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 21:28, Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 5:16 AM Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > >
> > > Jason Ekstrand requested a more efficient method than userptr+set-domain
> > > to determine if the userptr object was backed by a complete set of pages
> > > upon creation. To be more efficient than simply populating the userptr
> > > using get_user_pages() (as done by the call to set-domain or execbuf),
> > > we can walk the tree of vm_area_struct and check for gaps or vma not
> > > backed by struct page (VM_PFNMAP). The question is how to handle
> > > VM_MIXEDMAP which may be either struct page or pfn backed...
> > >
> > > With discrete are going to drop support for set_domain(), so offering a
> > > way to probe the pages, without having to resort to dummy batches has
> > > been requested.
> > >
> > > v2:
> > > - add new query param for the PROPBE flag, so userspace can easily
> > > check if the kernel supports it(Jason).
> > > - use mmap_read_{lock, unlock}.
> > > - add some kernel-doc.
> > >
> > > Testcase: igt/gem_userptr_blits/probe
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth@whitecape.org>
> > > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > > Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c | 3 ++
> > > include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 18 ++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > > index 56edfeff8c02..fd6880328596 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
> > > @@ -422,6 +422,33 @@ static const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_userptr_ops = {
> > >
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > +static int
> > > +probe_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, unsigned long len)
> > > +{
> > > + const unsigned long end = addr + len;
> > > + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > > + int ret = -EFAULT;
> > > +
> > > + mmap_read_lock(mm);
> > > + for (vma = find_vma(mm, addr); vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> > > + if (vma->vm_start > addr)
> >
> > Why isn't this > end? Are we somehow guaranteed that one vma covers
> > the entire range?
>
> AFAIK we are just making sure we don't have a hole(note that we also
> update addr below), for example the user might have done a partial
> munmap. There could be multiple vma's if the kernel was unable to
> merge them. If we reach the vm_end >= end, then we know we have a
> "valid" range.
Ok. That wasn't obvious to me but I see the addr update now. Makes
sense. Might be worth a one-line comment for the next guy. Either
way,
Reviewed-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Thanks for wiring this up!
--Jason
> >
> > > + break;
> > > +
> > > + if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP | VM_MIXEDMAP))
> > > + break;
> > > +
> > > + if (vma->vm_end >= end) {
> > > + ret = 0;
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + addr = vma->vm_end;
> > > + }
> > > + mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Creates a new mm object that wraps some normal memory from the process
> > > * context - user memory.
> > > @@ -477,7 +504,8 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (args->flags & ~(I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY |
> > > - I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED))
> > > + I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED |
> > > + I915_USERPTR_PROBE))
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > >
> > > if (i915_gem_object_size_2big(args->user_size))
> > > @@ -504,6 +532,16 @@ i915_gem_userptr_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> > > return -ENODEV;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + if (args->flags & I915_USERPTR_PROBE) {
> > > + /*
> > > + * Check that the range pointed to represents real struct
> > > + * pages and not iomappings (at this moment in time!)
> > > + */
> > > + ret = probe_range(current->mm, args->user_ptr, args->user_size);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER
> > > obj = i915_gem_object_alloc();
> > > if (obj == NULL)
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > > index 24e18219eb50..d6d2e1a10d14 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_getparam.c
> > > @@ -163,6 +163,9 @@ int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > > case I915_PARAM_PERF_REVISION:
> > > value = i915_perf_ioctl_version();
> > > break;
> > > + case I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > > + value = true;
> > > + break;
> > > default:
> > > DRM_DEBUG("Unknown parameter %d\n", param->param);
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > > index e20eeeca7a1c..2e4112bf4d38 100644
> > > --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> > > @@ -674,6 +674,9 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
> > > */
> > > #define I915_PARAM_HAS_EXEC_TIMELINE_FENCES 55
> > >
> > > +/* Query if the kernel supports the I915_USERPTR_PROBE flag. */
> > > +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE 56
> > > +
> > > /* Must be kept compact -- no holes and well documented */
> > >
> > > typedef struct drm_i915_getparam {
> > > @@ -2178,12 +2181,27 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_userptr {
> > > * through the GTT. If the HW can't support readonly access, an error is
> > > * returned.
> > > *
> > > + * I915_USERPTR_PROBE:
> > > + *
> > > + * Probe the provided @user_ptr range and validate that the @user_ptr is
> > > + * indeed pointing to normal memory and that the range is also valid.
> > > + * For example if some garbage address is given to the kernel, then this
> > > + * should complain.
> > > + *
> > > + * Returns -EFAULT if the probe failed.
> > > + *
> > > + * Note that this doesn't populate the backing pages.
> > > + *
> > > + * The kernel supports this feature if I915_PARAM_HAS_USERPTR_PROBE
> > > + * returns a non-zero value.
> > > + *
> > > * I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED:
> > > *
> > > * NOT USED. Setting this flag will result in an error.
> > > */
> > > __u32 flags;
> > > #define I915_USERPTR_READ_ONLY 0x1
> > > +#define I915_USERPTR_PROBE 0x2
> > > #define I915_USERPTR_UNSYNCHRONIZED 0x80000000
> > > /**
> > > * @handle: Returned handle for the object.
> > > --
> > > 2.26.3
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread