[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC v2 1/2] dma-buf: Introduce dma buffer sharing mechanism
    On Monday 05 December 2011 19:55:44 Daniel Vetter wrote:
    > > The only way to solve this that I can think of right now is to
    > > mandate that the mappings are all coherent (i.e. noncachable
    > > on noncoherent architectures like ARM). If you do that, you no
    > > longer need the sync_sg_for_* calls.
    > Woops, totally missed the addition of these. Can somebody explain to used
    > to rather coherent x86 what we need these for and the code-flow would look
    > like in a typical example. I was kinda assuming that devices would bracket
    > their use of a buffer with the attachment_map/unmap calls and any cache
    > coherency magic that might be needed would be somewhat transparent to
    > users of the interface?

    I'll describe how the respective functions work in the streaming mapping
    API (dma_map_*): You start out with a buffer that is owned by the CPU,
    i.e. the kernel can access it freely. When you call dma_map_sg or similar,
    a noncoherent device reading the buffer requires the cache to be flushed
    in order to see the data that was written by the CPU into the cache.

    After dma_map_sg, the device can perform both read and write accesses
    (depending on the flag to the map call), but the CPU is no longer allowed
    to read (which would allocate a cache line that may become invalid but
    remain marked as clean) or write (which would create a dirty cache line
    without writing it back) that buffer.

    Once the device is done, the driver calls dma_unmap_* and the buffer is
    again owned by the CPU. The device can no longer access it (in fact
    the address may be no longer be backed if there is an iommu) and the CPU
    can again read and write the buffer. On ARMv6 and higher, possibly some
    other architectures, dma_unmap_* also needs to invalidate the cache
    for the buffer, because due to speculative prefetching, there may also
    be a new clean cache line with stale data from an earlier version of
    the buffer.

    Since map/unmap is an expensive operation, the interface was extended
    to pass back the ownership to the CPU and back to the device while leaving
    the buffer mapped. dma_sync_sg_for_cpu invalidates the cache in the same
    way as dma_unmap_sg, so the CPU can access the buffer, and
    dma_sync_sg_for_device hands it back to the device by performing the
    same cache flush that dma_map_sg would do.

    You could for example do this if you want video input with a
    cacheable buffer, or in an rdma scenario with a buffer accessed
    by a remote machine.

    In case of software iommu (swiotlb, dmabounce), the map and sync
    functions don't do cache management but instead copy data between
    a buffer accessed by hardware and a different buffer accessed
    by the user.

    > The map call gets the dma_data_direction parameter, so it should be able
    > to do the right thing. And because we keep the attachement around, any
    > caching of mappings should be possible, too.
    > Yours, Daniel
    > PS: Slightly related, because it will make the coherency nightmare worse,
    > afaict: Can we kill mmap support?

    The mmap support is required (and only make sense) for consistent mappings,
    not for streaming mappings. The provider must ensure that if you map
    something uncacheable into the kernel in order to provide consistency,
    any mapping into user space must also be uncacheable. A driver
    that wants to have the buffer mapped to user space as many do should
    not need to know whether it is required to do cacheable or uncacheable
    mapping because of some other driver, and it should not need to worry
    about how to set up uncached mappings in user space.


     \ /
      Last update: 2011-12-05 20:33    [W:0.030 / U:3.048 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site