On 2026/01/16 16:20, Honglei Huang wrote:
On 2026/1/15 17:20, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
On 2026/01/15 16:58, Honglei Huang wrote:
From: Honglei Huang <[email protected]>
Hello,
This series adds virtio-gpu userptr support to enable ROCm native
context for compute workloads. The userptr feature allows the host to
directly access guest userspace memory without memcpy overhead, which is
essential for GPU compute performance.
The userptr implementation provides buffer-based zero-copy memory
access.
This approach pins guest userspace pages and exposes them to the host
via scatter-gather tables, enabling efficient compute operations.
This description looks identical with what
VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_MEM_HOST3D_GUEST does so there should be some
explanation how it makes difference.
I have already pointed out this when reviewing the QEMU patches[1],
but I note that here too, since QEMU is just a middleman and this
matter is better discussed by Linux and virglrenderer developers.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/35a8add7-da49-4833-9e69-
[email protected]/
Thanks for raising this important point about the distinction between
VIRTGPU_BLOB_FLAG_USE_USERPTR and VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_MEM_HOST3D_GUEST.
I might not have explained it clearly previously.
The key difference is memory ownership and lifecycle:
BLOB_MEM_HOST3D_GUEST:
- Kernel allocates memory (drm_gem_shmem_create)
- Userspace accesses via mmap(GEM_BO)
- Use case: Graphics resources (Vulkan/OpenGL)
BLOB_FLAG_USE_USERPTR:
- Userspace pre-allocates memory (malloc/mmap)
"Kernel allocates memory" and "userspace pre-allocates memory" is a bit
ambiguous phrasing. Either way, the userspace requests the kernel to map
memory with a system call, brk() or mmap().
- Kernel only get existing pages
- Use case: Compute workloads (ROCm/CUDA) with large datasets, like
GPU needs load a big model file 10G+, UMD mmap the fd file, then give
the mmap ptr into userspace then driver do not need a another copy.
But if the shmem is used, the userspace needs copy the file data into a
shmem mmap ptr there is a copy overhead.
Userptr:
file -> open/mmap -> userspace ptr -> driver
shmem:
user alloc shmem ──→ mmap shmem ──→ shmem userspace ptr -> driver
↑
│ copy
│
file ──→ open/mmap ──→ file userptr ──────────┘
For compute workloads, this matters significantly:
Without userptr: malloc(8GB) → alloc GEM BO → memcpy 8GB → compute →
memcpy 8GB back
With userptr: malloc(8GB) → create userptr BO → compute (zero-copy)
Why don't you alloc GEM BO first and read the file into there?
The explicit flag serves three purposes:
1. Although both send scatter-gather entries to host. The flag makes the
intent unambiguous.
Why will the host care?
2. Ensures consistency between flag and userptr address field.
Addresses are represented with the nr_entries and following struct
virtio_gpu_mem_entry entries, whenever
VIRTIO_GPU_CMD_RESOURCE_CREATE_BLOB or
VIRTIO_GPU_CMD_RESOURCE_ATTACH_BACKING is used. Having a special flag
introduces inconsistency.
3. Future HMM support: There is a plan to upgrade userptr implementation
to use Heterogeneous Memory Management for better GPU coherency and
dynamic page migration. The flag provides a clean path to future upgrade.
How will the upgrade path with the flag and the one without the flag
look like, and in what aspect the upgrade path with the flag is "cleaner"?
I understand the concern about API complexity. I'll defer to the virtio-
gpu maintainers for the final decision on whether this design is
acceptable or if they prefer an alternative approach.
It is fine to have API complexity. The problem here is the lack of clear
motivation and documentation.
Another way to put this is: how will you explain the flag in the virtio
specification? It should say "the driver MAY/SHOULD/MUST do something"
and/or "the device MAY/SHOULD/MUST do something", and then Linux and
virglrenderer can implement the flag accordingly.
Regards,
Akihiko Odaki
