Am 30.11.22 um 11:30 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 11:40:04AM -0500, Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
Le mercredi 23 novembre 2022 à 17:33 +0100, Daniel Vetter a écrit :
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:33:38AM +0200, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 18:33:59 +0100
Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com> wrote:
We should have come up with dma-heaps earlier and make it clear that
exporting a DMA-buf from a device gives you something device specific
which might or might not work with others.
Apart from that I agree, DMA-buf should be capable of handling this.
Question left is what documentation is missing to make it clear how
things are supposed to work?
Perhaps somewhat related from Daniel Stone that seems to have been
forgotten:
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Fdri-devel%2F20210905122742.86029-1-daniels%40collabora.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C45786a08e6dc4af2816508dad2bdf957%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638054011293521624%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=GjsoJGNoPozTS2SWeeirURzQatI5vfl9%2B%2BfzoavgTbw%3D&reserved=0
It aimed mostly at userspace, but sounds to me like the coherency stuff
could use a section of its own there?
Hm yeah it would be great to land that and then eventually extend. Daniel?
There is a lot of things documented in this document that have been said to be
completely wrong user-space behaviour in this thread. But it seems to pre-date
the DMA Heaps. The document also assume that DMA Heaps completely solves the CMA
vs system memory issue. But it also underline a very important aspect, that
userland is not aware which one to use. What this document suggest though seems
more realist then what has been said here.
Its overall a great document, it unfortunate that it only makes it into the DRM
mailing list.
The doc is more about document the current status quo/best practices,
which is very much not using dma-heaps.
The issue there is that currently userspace has no idea which dma-heap to
use for shared buffers, plus not all allocators are exposed through heaps
to begin with. We had this noted as a todo item (add some device->heap
sysfs links was the idea), until that's done all you can do is hardcode
the right heaps for the right usage in userspace, which is what android
does. Plus android doesn't have dgpu, so doesn't need the missing ttm
heap.
Hui? Why do you think we should have a TTM heap in the first place?
As far as I can see we need three different ways of allocation:
1. Normal system memory.
2. CMA based.
3. Device specific.
When any of the participating devices needs CMA then user space must use
the CMA heap, when any of the participating devices needs device
specific memory then user space must use device specific memory (from
that device).
It still can be that two devices can't talk with each other because both
needs the buffer to be allocated from device specific memory for a
particular use case, but at least all the cases for both none CPU cache
coherent ARM devices as well as device specific memory for scanout
should be handled with this.
Regards,
Christian.
But yeah the long-term aspiration also hasn't changed, because the
dma-heap todo list is also very, very old by now :-/
-Daniel
