Skip to contentSkip to conversation

virgl: fence fd support

PATCH Superseded Robert Foss 3 participants 17 messages Nov 5, 2018 – Nov 12, 2018

Subsystems (4)

v4 of 5 Superseded Latest is v5 →

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

v4 cover virgl: fence fd support

This series implements fence support for drm/virtio and has been tested using qemu, kmscube and the below branches.

Rob Herring solved a reference counting issue and suggested a context check for the execbuf ioctl, his changes have been included in the below commits to keep the tree working at all commits.

The linux series can be found here:
https://gitlab.collabora.com/robertfoss/linux/commits/virtio_fences_v4

As for mesa, the branch can be found here:
https://gitlab.collabora.com/robertfoss/mesa/commits/virtio_fences_v3

Changes since v3:
- Rebased on drm-misc-next
- drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc_fence()
- Gerd: Clarified and extended commit message
- Emil: Fixed whitespace issue
- Emil: Changed label name from fail_fence to fail_backoff
- Emil: Remove special case for !fence->drv in virtio_gpu_fence_cleanup()
- drm/virtio: add uapi for in and out explicit fences
- Emil: Added r-b
- Emil: Move fence_fd assignment to after sanity checks
- drm/virtio: add in-fences support for explicit synchronization
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block
- Emil: Make sure to always call dma_fence_put()
- Emil: Added r-b
- drm/virtio: add out-fences support for explicit synchronization
- Emil: Combine with in-fences patch
- drm/virtio: bump driver version after explicit synchronization addition
- Emil: Added r-b

Changes since v2:
- drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc_fence()
- Forward port and fix compilation issues
- drm/virtio: add uapi for in and out explicit fences
- Check exbuf->flags for unsupported flags
- drm/virtio: add in-fences support for explicit synchronization

Gustavo Padovan (1):
drm/virtio: bump driver version after explicit synchronization
addition

Robert Foss (3):
drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc_fence()
drm/virtio: add uapi for in and out explicit fences drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h   |   8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c |  29 +++++--
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c | 108 +++++++++++++++++++++----
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_plane.c |  46 +++++++++--
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c    |   2 +-
 include/uapi/drm/virtgpu_drm.h         |  13 ++-
 6 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
Signature · 6 lines
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
#1 lore raw

PATCH v4 1/4 drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc_fence()

Refactor fence creation, add fences to relevant GPU operations and add cursor helper functions.

This removes the potential for allocation failures from the cmd_submit and atomic_commit paths.
Now a fence will be allocated first and only after that will we proceed with the rest of the execution.

---
Changes since v3:
- Gerd: Clarified and extended commit message
- Emil: Fixed whitespace issue
- Emil: Changed label name from fail_fence to fail_backoff
- Emil: Remove special case for !fence->drv in virtio_gpu_fence_cleanup()

 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h   |  4 +++
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c | 29 ++++++++++++----
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c | 30 +++++++++++++++--
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_plane.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c    |  2 +-
 5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h +4 -0
index 6474e83cbf3d..acd130c58e33 100644
@@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ struct virtio_gpu_framebuffer {
 	int x1, y1, x2, y2; /* dirty rect */
 	spinlock_t dirty_lock;
 	uint32_t hw_res_handle;
+	struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence;
 };
 #define to_virtio_gpu_framebuffer(x) \
 	container_of(x, struct virtio_gpu_framebuffer, base)
@@ -349,6 +350,9 @@ void virtio_gpu_ttm_fini(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev);
 int virtio_gpu_mmap(struct file *filp, struct vm_area_struct *vma);
 
 /* virtio_gpu_fence.c */
+struct virtio_gpu_fence *virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(
+	struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev);
+void virtio_gpu_fence_cleanup(struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence);
 int virtio_gpu_fence_emit(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
 			  struct virtio_gpu_ctrl_hdr *cmd_hdr,
 			  struct virtio_gpu_fence **fence);
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c +22 -7
index 00c742a441bf..6b5d92215cfb 100644
@@ -67,6 +67,28 @@ static const struct dma_fence_ops virtio_fence_ops = {
 	.timeline_value_str  = virtio_timeline_value_str,
 };
 
+struct virtio_gpu_fence *virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev)
+{
+	struct virtio_gpu_fence_driver *drv = &vgdev->fence_drv;
+	struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence = kzalloc(sizeof(struct virtio_gpu_fence),
+							GFP_ATOMIC);
+	if (!fence)
+		return fence;
+
+	fence->drv = drv;
+	dma_fence_init(&fence->f, &virtio_fence_ops, &drv->lock, drv->context, 0);
+
+	return fence;
+}
+
+void virtio_gpu_fence_cleanup(struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence)
+{
+	if (!fence)
+		return;
+
+	dma_fence_put(&fence->f);
+}
+
 int virtio_gpu_fence_emit(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
 			  struct virtio_gpu_ctrl_hdr *cmd_hdr,
 			  struct virtio_gpu_fence **fence)
@@ -74,15 +96,8 @@ int virtio_gpu_fence_emit(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
 	struct virtio_gpu_fence_driver *drv = &vgdev->fence_drv;
 	unsigned long irq_flags;
 
-	*fence = kmalloc(sizeof(struct virtio_gpu_fence), GFP_ATOMIC);
-	if ((*fence) == NULL)
-		return -ENOMEM;
-
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&drv->lock, irq_flags);
-	(*fence)->drv = drv;
 	(*fence)->seq = ++drv->sync_seq;
-	dma_fence_init(&(*fence)->f, &virtio_fence_ops, &drv->lock,
-		       drv->context, (*fence)->seq);
 	dma_fence_get(&(*fence)->f);
 	list_add_tail(&(*fence)->node, &drv->fences);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&drv->lock, irq_flags);
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c +28 -2
index bc5afa4f906e..d69fc356df0a 100644
@@ -168,6 +168,13 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 		ret = PTR_ERR(buf);
 		goto out_unresv;
 	}
+
+	fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
+	if (!fence) {
+		kfree(buf);
+		ret = -ENOMEM;
+		goto out_unresv;
+	}
 	virtio_gpu_cmd_submit(vgdev, buf, exbuf->size,
 			      vfpriv->ctx_id, &fence);
 
@@ -283,11 +290,17 @@ static int virtio_gpu_resource_create_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 		rc_3d.nr_samples = cpu_to_le32(rc->nr_samples);
 		rc_3d.flags = cpu_to_le32(rc->flags);
 
+		fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
+		if (!fence) {
+			ret = -ENOMEM;
+			goto fail_backoff;
+		}
+
 		virtio_gpu_cmd_resource_create_3d(vgdev, qobj, &rc_3d, NULL);
 		ret = virtio_gpu_object_attach(vgdev, qobj, &fence);
 		if (ret) {
-			ttm_eu_backoff_reservation(&ticket, &validate_list);
-			goto fail_unref;
+			virtio_gpu_fence_cleanup(fence);
+			goto fail_backoff;
 		}
 		ttm_eu_fence_buffer_objects(&ticket, &validate_list, &fence->f);
 	}
@@ -312,6 +325,8 @@ static int virtio_gpu_resource_create_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 		dma_fence_put(&fence->f);
 	}
 	return 0;
+fail_backoff:
+	ttm_eu_backoff_reservation(&ticket, &validate_list);
 fail_unref:
 	if (vgdev->has_virgl_3d) {
 		virtio_gpu_unref_list(&validate_list);
@@ -374,6 +389,12 @@ static int virtio_gpu_transfer_from_host_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
 		goto out_unres;
 
 	convert_to_hw_box(&box, &args->box);
+
+	fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
+	if (!fence) {
+		ret = -ENOMEM;
+		goto out_unres;
+	}
 	virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_from_host_3d
 		(vgdev, qobj->hw_res_handle,
 		 vfpriv->ctx_id, offset, args->level,
@@ -423,6 +444,11 @@ static int virtio_gpu_transfer_to_host_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 			(vgdev, qobj, offset,
 			 box.w, box.h, box.x, box.y, NULL);
 	} else {
+		fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
+		if (!fence) {
+			ret = -ENOMEM;
+			goto out_unres;
+		}
 		virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_to_host_3d
 			(vgdev, qobj,
 			 vfpriv ? vfpriv->ctx_id : 0, offset,
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_plane.c +41 -5

73 lines not on this page · raw message

drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c +1 -1
index 51bef1775e47..93f2c3a51ee8 100644
@@ -896,9 +896,9 @@ void virtio_gpu_object_detach(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
 			      struct virtio_gpu_object *obj)
 {
 	bool use_dma_api = !virtio_has_iommu_quirk(vgdev->vdev);
-	struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence;
 
 	if (use_dma_api && obj->mapped) {
+		struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
 		/* detach backing and wait for the host process it ... */
 		virtio_gpu_cmd_resource_inval_backing(vgdev, obj->hw_res_handle, &fence);
 		dma_fence_wait(&fence->f, true);
Signature · 6 lines
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
#2 lore raw

PATCH v4 2/4 drm/virtio: add uapi for in and out explicit fences

In reply to Robert Foss

Add a new field called fence_fd that will be used by userspace to send in-fences to the kernel and receive out-fences created by the kernel.

This uapi enables virtio to take advantage of explicit synchronization of dma-bufs.

There are two new flags:

* VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN to be used when passing an in-fence fd.
* VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_OUT to be used when requesting an out-fence fd

The execbuffer IOCTL is now read-write to allow the userspace to read the out-fence.

On error -1 should be returned in the fence_fd field.

---

Changes since v3:
- Emil: Move fence_fd assignment to after sanity checks
- Emil: Added r-b

 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c |  5 +++++
 include/uapi/drm/virtgpu_drm.h         | 13 ++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c +5 -0
index d69fc356df0a..3d497835b0f5 100644
@@ -119,6 +119,11 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 	if (vgdev->has_virgl_3d == false)
 		return -ENOSYS;
 
+	if ((exbuf->flags & ~VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FLAGS))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	exbuf->fence_fd = -1;
+
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&validate_list);
 	if (exbuf->num_bo_handles) {
 
include/uapi/drm/virtgpu_drm.h +10 -3
index 9a781f0611df..91062f4ac7c5 100644
@@ -47,6 +47,13 @@ extern "C" {
 #define DRM_VIRTGPU_WAIT     0x08
 #define DRM_VIRTGPU_GET_CAPS  0x09
 
+#define VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN	0x01
+#define VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_OUT	0x02
+#define VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FLAGS  (\
+		VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN |\
+		VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_OUT |\
+		0)
+
 struct drm_virtgpu_map {
 	__u64 offset; /* use for mmap system call */
 	__u32 handle;
@@ -54,12 +61,12 @@ struct drm_virtgpu_map {
 };
 
 struct drm_virtgpu_execbuffer {
-	__u32		flags;		/* for future use */
+	__u32 flags;
 	__u32 size;
 	__u64 command; /* void* */
 	__u64 bo_handles;
 	__u32 num_bo_handles;
-	__u32 pad;
+	__s32 fence_fd;
 };
 
 #define VIRTGPU_PARAM_3D_FEATURES 1 /* do we have 3D features in the hw */
@@ -137,7 +144,7 @@ struct drm_virtgpu_get_caps {
 	DRM_IOWR(DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_VIRTGPU_MAP, struct drm_virtgpu_map)
 
 #define DRM_IOCTL_VIRTGPU_EXECBUFFER \
-	DRM_IOW(DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_VIRTGPU_EXECBUFFER,\
+	DRM_IOWR(DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_VIRTGPU_EXECBUFFER,\
 		struct drm_virtgpu_execbuffer)
 
 #define DRM_IOCTL_VIRTGPU_GETPARAM \
Signature · 6 lines
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
#3 lore raw

PATCH v4 3/4 drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

In reply to Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block
- Emil: Make sure to always call dma_fence_put()
- Emil: Added r-b

 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c +64 -17
index 3d497835b0f5..340f2513d829 100644
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
 #include <drm/drmP.h>
 #include <drm/virtgpu_drm.h>
 #include <drm/ttm/ttm_execbuf_util.h>
+#include <linux/sync_file.h>
 
 #include "virtgpu_drv.h"
 
@@ -105,7 +106,7 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 	struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev = dev->dev_private;
 	struct virtio_gpu_fpriv *vfpriv = drm_file->driver_priv;
 	struct drm_gem_object *gobj;
-	struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence;
+	struct virtio_gpu_fence *out_fence;
 	struct virtio_gpu_object *qobj;
 	int ret;
 	uint32_t *bo_handles = NULL;
@@ -114,6 +115,9 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 	struct ttm_validate_buffer *buflist = NULL;
 	int i;
 	struct ww_acquire_ctx ticket;
+	struct sync_file *sync_file;
+	int in_fence_fd = exbuf->fence_fd;
+	int out_fence_fd = -1;
 	void *buf;
 
 	if (vgdev->has_virgl_3d == false)
@@ -124,6 +128,33 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 
 	exbuf->fence_fd = -1;
 
+	if (exbuf->flags & VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN) {
+		struct dma_fence *in_fence;
+
+		in_fence = sync_file_get_fence(in_fence_fd);
+
+		if (!in_fence)
+			return -EINVAL;
+
+		/*
+		 * Wait if the fence is from a foreign context, or if the fence
+		 * array contains any fence from a foreign context.
+		 */
+		ret = 0;
+		if (!dma_fence_match_context(in_fence, vgdev->fence_drv.context))
+			ret = dma_fence_wait(in_fence, true);
+
+		dma_fence_put(in_fence);
+		if (ret)
+			return ret;
+	}
+
+	if (exbuf->flags & VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_OUT) {
+		out_fence_fd = get_unused_fd_flags(O_CLOEXEC);
+		if (out_fence_fd < 0)
+			return out_fence_fd;
+	}
+
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&validate_list);
 	if (exbuf->num_bo_handles) {
 
@@ -133,26 +164,22 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 					   sizeof(struct ttm_validate_buffer),
 					   GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
 		if (!bo_handles || !buflist) {
-			kvfree(bo_handles);
-			kvfree(buflist);
-			return -ENOMEM;
+			ret = -ENOMEM;
+			goto out_unused_fd;
 		}
 
 		user_bo_handles = (void __user *)(uintptr_t)exbuf->bo_handles;
 		if (copy_from_user(bo_handles, user_bo_handles,
 				   exbuf->num_bo_handles * sizeof(uint32_t))) {
 			ret = -EFAULT;
-			kvfree(bo_handles);
-			kvfree(buflist);
-			return ret;
+			goto out_unused_fd;
 		}
 
 		for (i = 0; i < exbuf->num_bo_handles; i++) {
 			gobj = drm_gem_object_lookup(drm_file, bo_handles[i]);
 			if (!gobj) {
-				kvfree(bo_handles);
-				kvfree(buflist);
-				return -ENOENT;
+				ret = -ENOENT;
+				goto out_unused_fd;
 			}
 
 			qobj = gem_to_virtio_gpu_obj(gobj);
@@ -161,6 +188,7 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 			list_add(&buflist[i].head, &validate_list);
 		}
 		kvfree(bo_handles);
+		bo_handles = NULL;
 	}
 
 	ret = virtio_gpu_object_list_validate(&ticket, &validate_list);
@@ -174,28 +202,47 @@ static int virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
 		goto out_unresv;
 	}
 
-	fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
-	if (!fence) {
-		kfree(buf);
+	out_fence = virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(vgdev);
+	if(!out_fence) {
 		ret = -ENOMEM;
-		goto out_unresv;
+		goto out_memdup;
+	}
+
+	if (out_fence_fd >= 0) {
+		sync_file = sync_file_create(&out_fence->f);
+		if (!sync_file) {
+			dma_fence_put(&out_fence->f);
+			ret = -ENOMEM;
+			goto out_memdup;
+		}
+
+		exbuf->fence_fd = out_fence_fd;
+		fd_install(out_fence_fd, sync_file->file);
 	}
+
 	virtio_gpu_cmd_submit(vgdev, buf, exbuf->size,
-			      vfpriv->ctx_id, &fence);
+			      vfpriv->ctx_id, &out_fence);
 
-	ttm_eu_fence_buffer_objects(&ticket, &validate_list, &fence->f);
+	ttm_eu_fence_buffer_objects(&ticket, &validate_list, &out_fence->f);
 
 	/* fence the command bo */
 	virtio_gpu_unref_list(&validate_list);
 	kvfree(buflist);
-	dma_fence_put(&fence->f);
 	return 0;
 
+out_memdup:
+	kfree(buf);
 out_unresv:
 	ttm_eu_backoff_reservation(&ticket, &validate_list);
 out_free:
 	virtio_gpu_unref_list(&validate_list);
+out_unused_fd:
+	kvfree(bo_handles);
 	kvfree(buflist);
+
+	if (out_fence_fd >= 0)
+		put_unused_fd(out_fence_fd);
+
 	return ret;
 }
 
Signature · 1 line
2.17.1
#4 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Quoted 8 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

Quoted 8 lines

---

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.
Merging the two patches makes things a bit meh. But as before - it's for Gerd to make the final call.

-Emil

#5 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Heya,

Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

I can't say I understood that part, but I'll happily spin another revision with more documentation added.

But the change above does not entirely come from your feedback. While looking into how other drivers do this, an issue in msm was found. Since this code is being added to virtgpu now, we might as well do the right thing here, and also end up with all of the in fence handling in a single chunk.

Quoted 9 lines

Merging the two patches makes things a bit meh. But as before - it's for Gerd to make the final call.

-Emil
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

maintainer
#6 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

In reply to Emil Velikov
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

cheers,
Gerd

#7 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Hey Gerd,

Quoted 16 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

On it! Will send out a v5.

Quoted 2 lines

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to.

Quoted 9 lines

cheers,
Gerd

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

maintainer
#8 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Quoted 27 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd,

Quoted 16 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

Quoted 6 lines

On it! Will send out a v5.

Quoted 2 lines

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to.

fence_in_fd & fence_out_fd in the ioctl struct (patch #2).

cheers,
Gerd

#9 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Hey Gerd

Quoted 28 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 27 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd,

Quoted 23 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines

On it! Will send out a v5.

Quoted 2 lines

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to.

fence_in_fd & fence_out_fd in the ioctl struct (patch #2).

I had a look into this and how other drivers are doing it. msm[1] and etnaviv[2] seem to use the same dual-use variable.

There may be some value to keeping the virtgpu congruent with the other drivers, but I'll leave the final call up to you.

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/drm/msm_drm.h#L223

[2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/drm/etnaviv_drm.h#L197

Rob.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

maintainer
#10 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Quoted 34 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd

Quoted 31 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 30 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd,

Quoted 16 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

On it! Will send out a v5.

Quoted 1 line
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to.

fence_in_fd & fence_out_fd in the ioctl struct (patch #2).

I had a look into this and how other drivers are doing it. msm[1] and etnaviv[2] seem to use the same dual-use variable.

Ok, lets do it the same way then.
What is the status of the userspace side of this?

cheers,
Gerd

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

#11 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Quoted 39 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 38 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd

Quoted 35 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 33 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd,

Quoted 16 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

On it! Will send out a v5.

Quoted 2 lines

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to.

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line

fence_in_fd & fence_out_fd in the ioctl struct (patch #2).

I had a look into this and how other drivers are doing it. msm[1] and etnaviv[2] seem to use the same dual-use variable.

Ok, lets do it the same way then.
What is the status of the userspace side of this?

The patch is hosted here[1], but is as of yet unmerged.

I know the drm subsystem requires a userspace implementation of all features, but does it have to be upstreamed first?

[1] https://gitlab.collabora.com/robertfoss/mesa/commits/virtio_fences_v3

Rob.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

maintainer
#12 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

Hi,

Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines

I had a look into this and how other drivers are doing it. msm[1] and etnaviv[2] seem to use the same dual-use variable.

Ok, lets do it the same way then.
What is the status of the userspace side of this?

The patch is hosted here[1], but is as of yet unmerged.

I know the drm subsystem requires a userspace implementation of all features, but does it have to be upstreamed first?

Which part is merged first doesn't matter much I think, but both kernel and userspace side patches should be reviewed, especially the API bits, so we don't end up with a bad API.

cheers,
Gerd

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

maintainer
#13 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

In reply to Robert Foss
Quoted 27 lines · Robert Foss

Hey Gerd,

Quoted 16 lines · Gerd Hoffmann
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

Quoted 6 lines

On it! Will send out a v5.

Quoted 2 lines

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to.

fence_in_fd & fence_out_fd in the ioctl struct (patch #2).

cheers,
Gerd

maintainer
#14 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

In reply to Emil Velikov
Quoted 15 lines · Emil Velikov
Quoted 14 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

---

Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.

Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice.

Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds?

cheers,
Gerd

#15 lore raw

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drm/virtio: add in/out fence support for explicit synchronization

In reply to Robert Foss
Quoted 8 lines · Robert Foss

When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call.

On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On error -1 is returned to userspace.

Quoted 8 lines

---

Changes since v3:
- Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block

Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence.
Merging the two patches makes things a bit meh. But as before - it's for Gerd to make the final call.

-Emil

#16 lore raw

PATCH v4 4/4 drm/virtio: bump driver version after explicit synchronization addition

In reply to Robert Foss

From: Gustavo Padovan <[email protected]>

To reflect the (backward compatible) changes in the uabi we are bumping the driver's version.

---

Changes since v3:
- Emil: Added r-b

 drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_drv.h +2 -2
index acd130c58e33..4632bd7e1972 100644
@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@
 #define DRIVER_DATE "0"
 
 #define DRIVER_MAJOR 0
-#define DRIVER_MINOR 0
-#define DRIVER_PATCHLEVEL 1
+#define DRIVER_MINOR 1
+#define DRIVER_PATCHLEVEL 0
 
 /* virtgpu_drm_bus.c */
 int drm_virtio_init(struct drm_driver *driver, struct virtio_device *vdev);
Signature · 6 lines
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel