| Message ID | 1375866908-5000-2-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 11:15:06AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their > native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. > > To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > > Cc: Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> > Cc: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Any perverse driver could always call into drm_gem_dmabuf_release() with container_of(). Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> -Chris
> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] > Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM > To: DRI Development > Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae > Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos > drivers > > Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their > native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. > > To use the release helper we need to export it, too. Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to export with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. Thanks, Inki Dae > > Cc: Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> > Cc: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c | 3 ++- > drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c | 23 +---------------------- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c | 13 +------------ > include/drm/drmP.h | 1 + > 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c > index 85e450e..a35f206 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c > @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static void drm_gem_unmap_dma_buf(struct > dma_buf_attachment *attach, > /* nothing to be done here */ > } > > -static void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) > +void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) > { > struct drm_gem_object *obj = dma_buf->priv; > > @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ static void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf > *dma_buf) > drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(obj); > } > } > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_gem_dmabuf_release); > > static void *drm_gem_dmabuf_vmap(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) > { > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c > index a0f997e..3cd56e1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c > @@ -127,27 +127,6 @@ static void exynos_gem_unmap_dma_buf(struct > dma_buf_attachment *attach, > /* Nothing to do. */ > } > > -static void exynos_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dmabuf) > -{ > - struct exynos_drm_gem_obj *exynos_gem_obj = dmabuf->priv; > - > - /* > - * exynos_dmabuf_release() call means that file object's > - * f_count is 0 and it calls drm_gem_object_handle_unreference() > - * to drop the references that these values had been increased > - * at drm_prime_handle_to_fd() > - */ > - if (exynos_gem_obj->base.export_dma_buf == dmabuf) { > - exynos_gem_obj->base.export_dma_buf = NULL; > - > - /* > - * drop this gem object refcount to release allocated buffer > - * and resources. > - */ > - drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(&exynos_gem_obj->base); > - } > -} > - > static void *exynos_gem_dmabuf_kmap_atomic(struct dma_buf *dma_buf, > unsigned long page_num) > { > @@ -193,7 +172,7 @@ static struct dma_buf_ops exynos_dmabuf_ops = { > .kunmap = exynos_gem_dmabuf_kunmap, > .kunmap_atomic = exynos_gem_dmabuf_kunmap_atomic, > .mmap = exynos_gem_dmabuf_mmap, > - .release = exynos_dmabuf_release, > + .release = drm_gem_dmabuf_release, > }; > > struct dma_buf *exynos_dmabuf_prime_export(struct drm_device *drm_dev, > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c > index f2e185c..63ee1a9 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c > @@ -90,17 +90,6 @@ static void i915_gem_unmap_dma_buf(struct > dma_buf_attachment *attachment, > kfree(sg); > } > > -static void i915_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) > -{ > - struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = dma_buf->priv; > - > - if (obj->base.export_dma_buf == dma_buf) { > - /* drop the reference on the export fd holds */ > - obj->base.export_dma_buf = NULL; > - drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(&obj->base); > - } > -} > - > static void *i915_gem_dmabuf_vmap(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) > { > struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = dma_buf->priv; > @@ -211,7 +200,7 @@ static int i915_gem_begin_cpu_access(struct dma_buf > *dma_buf, size_t start, size > static const struct dma_buf_ops i915_dmabuf_ops = { > .map_dma_buf = i915_gem_map_dma_buf, > .unmap_dma_buf = i915_gem_unmap_dma_buf, > - .release = i915_gem_dmabuf_release, > + .release = drm_gem_dmabuf_release, > .kmap = i915_gem_dmabuf_kmap, > .kmap_atomic = i915_gem_dmabuf_kmap_atomic, > .kunmap = i915_gem_dmabuf_kunmap, > diff --git a/include/drm/drmP.h b/include/drm/drmP.h > index 4b518e0..cc991a2 100644 > --- a/include/drm/drmP.h > +++ b/include/drm/drmP.h > @@ -1537,6 +1537,7 @@ extern struct drm_gem_object > *drm_gem_prime_import(struct drm_device *dev, > struct dma_buf *dma_buf); > extern int drm_gem_prime_fd_to_handle(struct drm_device *dev, > struct drm_file *file_priv, int prime_fd, uint32_t *handle); > +extern void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf); > > extern int drm_prime_handle_to_fd_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void > *data, > struct drm_file *file_priv); > -- > 1.8.3.2
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM >> To: DRI Development >> Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae >> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos >> drivers >> >> Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their >> native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base >> drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. >> >> To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > > Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to export > with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. I'm confused here what you mean, so pls just submit the patch. That usually helps ;-) -Daniel
On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM >>> To: DRI Development >>> Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae >>> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos >>> drivers >>> >>> Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their >>> native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base >>> drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. >>> >>> To use the release helper we need to export it, too. >> Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to export >> with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common drm_gem_dmabuf. Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. Thanks. > I'm confused here what you mean, so pls just submit the patch. That > usually helps ;-) > -Daniel
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM > >>>To: DRI Development > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos > >>>drivers > >>> > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. > >>> > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to export > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. > > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common drm_gem_dmabuf. > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? -Daniel
On 08/07/2013 07:21 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: >> On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM >>>>> To: DRI Development >>>>> Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae >>>>> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos >>>>> drivers >>>>> >>>>> Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their >>>>> native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base >>>>> drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. >>>>> >>>>> To use the release helper we need to export it, too. >>>> Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to export >>>> with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. >> I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common drm_gem_dmabuf. >> Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common >> drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. > Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? > -Daniel I think it doesn't matter.
2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > > >>>-----Original Message----- > > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] > > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM > > >>>To: DRI Development > > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae > > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in > i915/exynos > > >>>drivers > > >>> > > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their > > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. > > >>> > > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to > export > > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. > > > > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common drm_gem_dmabuf. > > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common > > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. > > Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? > Daniel, could you remove exynos related codes from your patch set? Your patch set would make exynos broken because you didn't consider exporting with a gem object for exynos like [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: explicit store base gem object in dma_buf->priv. So I think your patch set is not complete set, and That is why exynos needs the additional work I mentioned above. So I just wanted to repost your patch set + new one. However, I think not only exynos could go to common drm_gem_dmabuf directly but also it would make your patch set to be complete set if you remove exynos related codes from your patch set. Otherwise, we have to work twice. one is the additional work for resolving exynos broken issue by your patch set, and other is to replace existing dmabuf stuff of exynos to common drm_gem_dmabuf. Thanks, Inki Dae > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel >
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > > > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> >> >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: >> > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: >> > >>>-----Original Message----- >> > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] >> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM >> > >>>To: DRI Development >> > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae >> > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in >> > >>> i915/exynos >> > >>>drivers >> > >>> >> > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their >> > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base >> > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. >> > >>> >> > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. >> > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to >> > >> export >> > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. >> > >> > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common drm_gem_dmabuf. >> > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common >> > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. >> >> Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? > > > Daniel, could you remove exynos related codes from your patch set? Your > patch set would make exynos broken because you didn't consider exporting > with a gem object for exynos like [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: explicit store base > gem object in dma_buf->priv. So I think your patch set is not complete set, > and That is why exynos needs the additional work I mentioned above. So I > just wanted to repost your patch set + new one. Nope, my patch should not break exynos since the base gem_object is the first member of the exynos object, so we don't have any issues with upcasting in exynos dma-buf code. The same applies to i915 dma-buf code, my follow-up patch just makes the code a bit safer. > However, I think not only exynos could go to common drm_gem_dmabuf directly > but also it would make your patch set to be complete set if you remove > exynos related codes from your patch set. Otherwise, we have to work twice. > one is the additional work for resolving exynos broken issue by your patch > set, and other is to replace existing dmabuf stuff of exynos to common > drm_gem_dmabuf. Yeah np, I'll drop exynos then. -Daniel
2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > > > > > > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > >> > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> > wrote: > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >> > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] > >> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM > >> > >>>To: DRI Development > >> > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae > >> > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in > >> > >>> i915/exynos > >> > >>>drivers > >> > >>> > >> > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their > >> > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > >> > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. > >> > >>> > >> > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > >> > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to > >> > >> export > >> > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. > >> > > >> > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common > drm_gem_dmabuf. > >> > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common > >> > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. > >> > >> Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? > > > > > > Daniel, could you remove exynos related codes from your patch set? Your > > patch set would make exynos broken because you didn't consider exporting > > with a gem object for exynos like [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: explicit store > base > > gem object in dma_buf->priv. So I think your patch set is not complete > set, > > and That is why exynos needs the additional work I mentioned above. So I > > just wanted to repost your patch set + new one. > > Nope, my patch should not break exynos since the base gem_object is > the first member of the exynos object, so we don't have any issues > Ah, right. However, it does not seem like good way. > with upcasting in exynos dma-buf code. The same applies to i915 > dma-buf code, my follow-up patch just makes the code a bit safer. > > > > > > However, I think not only exynos could go to common drm_gem_dmabuf > directly > > but also it would make your patch set to be complete set if you remove > > exynos related codes from your patch set. Otherwise, we have to work > twice. > > one is the additional work for resolving exynos broken issue by your > patch > > set, and other is to replace existing dmabuf stuff of exynos to common > > drm_gem_dmabuf. > > Yeah np, I'll drop exynos then. > Thanks a lot. :) Thanks, Inki Dae > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel >
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 09:37:52PM +0900, Inki Dae wrote: > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > > >> > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > >> > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> > > wrote: > > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- > > >> > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] > > >> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM > > >> > >>>To: DRI Development > > >> > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae > > >> > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in > > >> > >>> i915/exynos > > >> > >>>drivers > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their > > >> > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > > >> > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > > >> > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also need to > > >> > >> export > > >> > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. > > >> > > > >> > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common > > drm_gem_dmabuf. > > >> > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to common > > >> > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. > > >> > > >> Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? > > > > > > > > > Daniel, could you remove exynos related codes from your patch set? Your > > > patch set would make exynos broken because you didn't consider exporting > > > with a gem object for exynos like [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: explicit store > > base > > > gem object in dma_buf->priv. So I think your patch set is not complete > > set, > > > and That is why exynos needs the additional work I mentioned above. So I > > > just wanted to repost your patch set + new one. > > > > Nope, my patch should not break exynos since the base gem_object is > > the first member of the exynos object, so we don't have any issues > > > > Ah, right. However, it does not seem like good way. > > > > with upcasting in exynos dma-buf code. The same applies to i915 > > dma-buf code, my follow-up patch just makes the code a bit safer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I think not only exynos could go to common drm_gem_dmabuf > > directly > > > but also it would make your patch set to be complete set if you remove > > > exynos related codes from your patch set. Otherwise, we have to work > > twice. > > > one is the additional work for resolving exynos broken issue by your > > patch > > > set, and other is to replace existing dmabuf stuff of exynos to common > > > drm_gem_dmabuf. > > > > Yeah np, I'll drop exynos then. > > > > Thanks a lot. :) Ah, I remember again why I want to also convert over exynos to the common dma buf release function: Later patches in my prime locking series will change things in there to avoid a userspace-triggerable oops. If we leave out exynos it'll break rather badly for dma-buf export. I need to think a bit more about what stuff looks like atm, but if I resend those parts I'll include exynos. It's a bit tricky that it still works, but that way you can fix it up without the introduction of a bisect failure point. -Daniel
> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] On Behalf Of Daniel > Vetter > Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:21 AM > To: Inki Dae > Cc: Daniel Vetter; Intel Graphics Development; DRI Development > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in > i915/exynos drivers > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 09:37:52PM +0900, Inki Dae wrote: > > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > > > >> > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > >> > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- > > > >> > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] > > > >> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM > > > >> > >>>To: DRI Development > > > >> > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae > > > >> > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in > > > >> > >>> i915/exynos > > > >> > >>>drivers > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store > their > > > >> > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base > > > >> > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is > ok. > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. > > > >> > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also > need to > > > >> > >> export > > > >> > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. > > > >> > > > > >> > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common > > > drm_gem_dmabuf. > > > >> > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to > common > > > >> > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime helpers. > > > >> > > > >> Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? > > > > > > > > > > > > Daniel, could you remove exynos related codes from your patch set? > Your > > > > patch set would make exynos broken because you didn't consider > exporting > > > > with a gem object for exynos like [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: explicit > store > > > base > > > > gem object in dma_buf->priv. So I think your patch set is not > complete > > > set, > > > > and That is why exynos needs the additional work I mentioned above. > So I > > > > just wanted to repost your patch set + new one. > > > > > > Nope, my patch should not break exynos since the base gem_object is > > > the first member of the exynos object, so we don't have any issues > > > > > > > Ah, right. However, it does not seem like good way. > > > > > > > with upcasting in exynos dma-buf code. The same applies to i915 > > > dma-buf code, my follow-up patch just makes the code a bit safer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I think not only exynos could go to common drm_gem_dmabuf > > > directly > > > > but also it would make your patch set to be complete set if you > remove > > > > exynos related codes from your patch set. Otherwise, we have to work > > > twice. > > > > one is the additional work for resolving exynos broken issue by your > > > patch > > > > set, and other is to replace existing dmabuf stuff of exynos to > common > > > > drm_gem_dmabuf. > > > > > > Yeah np, I'll drop exynos then. > > > > > > > Thanks a lot. :) > > Ah, I remember again why I want to also convert over exynos to the common > dma buf release function: Later patches in my prime locking series will > change things in there to avoid a userspace-triggerable oops. If we leave > out exynos it'll break rather badly for dma-buf export. > > I need to think a bit more about what stuff looks like atm, but if I > resend those parts I'll include exynos. It's a bit tricky that it still > works, but that way you can fix it up without the introduction of a bisect > failure point. I'll repost your patch set + new one that exports to a common gem object; already worked and tested. I think it's good for they to be one set because only using the patch 1/3 doesn't look good even though Exynos works fine with the path 1/3. So I'll repost it like below if you agree with me, [PATCH 0/4] Small i915/exynos prime cleanup [PATCH 1/4] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos drivers [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: unpin backing storage in dmabuf_unmap [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: explicit store base gem object in dma_buf->priv [PATCH 4/4] drm/exynos: explicit store base gem object in dma_buf->priv After this, you can take care of them until merged to next. Or you can repost this patch set including my patch again. What you proper doesn't matter to me. :) And it seems better that exynos keeps using existing dmabuf interfaces without replacing them to common drm_gem_dmabuf ones because we may need features only for Exynos. Actually, now exynos dmabuf includes some features related to v4l2 and gpu driver for more performance. Thanks, Inki Dae > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] On Behalf Of Daniel >> Vetter >> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:21 AM >> To: Inki Dae >> Cc: Daniel Vetter; Intel Graphics Development; DRI Development >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in >> i915/exynos drivers >> >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 09:37:52PM +0900, Inki Dae wrote: >> > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> >> > >> > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 2013/8/7 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> >> > > >> >> > > >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 07:18:45PM +0900, Joonyoung Shim wrote: >> > > >> > On 08/07/2013 06:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> > > >> > >On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- >> > > >> > >>>From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch] >> > > >> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:15 PM >> > > >> > >>>To: DRI Development >> > > >> > >>>Cc: Intel Graphics Development; Daniel Vetter; Inki Dae >> > > >> > >>>Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in >> > > >> > >>> i915/exynos >> > > >> > >>>drivers >> > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>>Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store >> their >> > > >> > >>>native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base >> > > >> > >>>drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is >> ok. >> > > >> > >>> >> > > >> > >>>To use the release helper we need to export it, too. >> > > >> > >>Yeah, may I repost this patch with additional work? We also >> need to >> > > >> > >> export >> > > >> > >>with a gem object instead of specific one like you did. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > I think dmabuf stuff of exynos can be replaced to common >> > > drm_gem_dmabuf. >> > > >> > Already dmabuf stuff of drm_gem_cma_helper.c was substituted to >> common >> > > >> > drm_gem_dmabuf with low-level hook functions to use prime > helpers. >> > > >> >> > > >> Ah, but that can easily be done on top of this, right? >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Daniel, could you remove exynos related codes from your patch set? >> Your >> > > > patch set would make exynos broken because you didn't consider >> exporting >> > > > with a gem object for exynos like [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: explicit >> store >> > > base >> > > > gem object in dma_buf->priv. So I think your patch set is not >> complete >> > > set, >> > > > and That is why exynos needs the additional work I mentioned above. >> So I >> > > > just wanted to repost your patch set + new one. >> > > >> > > Nope, my patch should not break exynos since the base gem_object is >> > > the first member of the exynos object, so we don't have any issues >> > > >> > >> > Ah, right. However, it does not seem like good way. >> > >> > >> > > with upcasting in exynos dma-buf code. The same applies to i915 >> > > dma-buf code, my follow-up patch just makes the code a bit safer. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > However, I think not only exynos could go to common drm_gem_dmabuf >> > > directly >> > > > but also it would make your patch set to be complete set if you >> remove >> > > > exynos related codes from your patch set. Otherwise, we have to work >> > > twice. >> > > > one is the additional work for resolving exynos broken issue by your >> > > patch >> > > > set, and other is to replace existing dmabuf stuff of exynos to >> common >> > > > drm_gem_dmabuf. >> > > >> > > Yeah np, I'll drop exynos then. >> > > >> > >> > Thanks a lot. :) >> >> Ah, I remember again why I want to also convert over exynos to the common >> dma buf release function: Later patches in my prime locking series will >> change things in there to avoid a userspace-triggerable oops. If we leave >> out exynos it'll break rather badly for dma-buf export. >> >> I need to think a bit more about what stuff looks like atm, but if I >> resend those parts I'll include exynos. It's a bit tricky that it still >> works, but that way you can fix it up without the introduction of a bisect >> failure point. > > I'll repost your patch set + new one that exports to a common gem object; > already worked and tested. I think it's good for they to be one set because > only using the patch 1/3 doesn't look good even though Exynos works fine > with the path 1/3. > > So I'll repost it like below if you agree with me, > [PATCH 0/4] Small i915/exynos prime cleanup > [PATCH 1/4] drm: use common drm_gem_dmabuf_release in i915/exynos drivers > [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: unpin backing storage in dmabuf_unmap > [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: explicit store base gem object in dma_buf->priv > [PATCH 4/4] drm/exynos: explicit store base gem object in dma_buf->priv > > After this, you can take care of them until merged to next. Or you can > repost this patch set including my patch again. What you proper doesn't > matter to me. :) Yeah, sounds like a plan. And I think those 4 patches can go in earlier, the later patches I have need some more thought. Note that the i915 patches have new versions meanwhile, so if you just submit the exynos one I can integrate into my series. -Daniel
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c index 85e450e..a35f206 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static void drm_gem_unmap_dma_buf(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, /* nothing to be done here */ } -static void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) +void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) { struct drm_gem_object *obj = dma_buf->priv; @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ static void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(obj); } } +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_gem_dmabuf_release); static void *drm_gem_dmabuf_vmap(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) { diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c index a0f997e..3cd56e1 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c @@ -127,27 +127,6 @@ static void exynos_gem_unmap_dma_buf(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, /* Nothing to do. */ } -static void exynos_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dmabuf) -{ - struct exynos_drm_gem_obj *exynos_gem_obj = dmabuf->priv; - - /* - * exynos_dmabuf_release() call means that file object's - * f_count is 0 and it calls drm_gem_object_handle_unreference() - * to drop the references that these values had been increased - * at drm_prime_handle_to_fd() - */ - if (exynos_gem_obj->base.export_dma_buf == dmabuf) { - exynos_gem_obj->base.export_dma_buf = NULL; - - /* - * drop this gem object refcount to release allocated buffer - * and resources. - */ - drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(&exynos_gem_obj->base); - } -} - static void *exynos_gem_dmabuf_kmap_atomic(struct dma_buf *dma_buf, unsigned long page_num) { @@ -193,7 +172,7 @@ static struct dma_buf_ops exynos_dmabuf_ops = { .kunmap = exynos_gem_dmabuf_kunmap, .kunmap_atomic = exynos_gem_dmabuf_kunmap_atomic, .mmap = exynos_gem_dmabuf_mmap, - .release = exynos_dmabuf_release, + .release = drm_gem_dmabuf_release, }; struct dma_buf *exynos_dmabuf_prime_export(struct drm_device *drm_dev, diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c index f2e185c..63ee1a9 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c @@ -90,17 +90,6 @@ static void i915_gem_unmap_dma_buf(struct dma_buf_attachment *attachment, kfree(sg); } -static void i915_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) -{ - struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = dma_buf->priv; - - if (obj->base.export_dma_buf == dma_buf) { - /* drop the reference on the export fd holds */ - obj->base.export_dma_buf = NULL; - drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(&obj->base); - } -} - static void *i915_gem_dmabuf_vmap(struct dma_buf *dma_buf) { struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = dma_buf->priv; @@ -211,7 +200,7 @@ static int i915_gem_begin_cpu_access(struct dma_buf *dma_buf, size_t start, size static const struct dma_buf_ops i915_dmabuf_ops = { .map_dma_buf = i915_gem_map_dma_buf, .unmap_dma_buf = i915_gem_unmap_dma_buf, - .release = i915_gem_dmabuf_release, + .release = drm_gem_dmabuf_release, .kmap = i915_gem_dmabuf_kmap, .kmap_atomic = i915_gem_dmabuf_kmap_atomic, .kunmap = i915_gem_dmabuf_kunmap, diff --git a/include/drm/drmP.h b/include/drm/drmP.h index 4b518e0..cc991a2 100644 --- a/include/drm/drmP.h +++ b/include/drm/drmP.h @@ -1537,6 +1537,7 @@ extern struct drm_gem_object *drm_gem_prime_import(struct drm_device *dev, struct dma_buf *dma_buf); extern int drm_gem_prime_fd_to_handle(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file_priv, int prime_fd, uint32_t *handle); +extern void drm_gem_dmabuf_release(struct dma_buf *dma_buf); extern int drm_prime_handle_to_fd_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_priv);
Note that this is slightly tricky since both drivers store their native objects in dma_buf->priv. But both also embed the base drm_gem_object at the first position, so the implicit cast is ok. To use the release helper we need to export it, too. Cc: Inki Dae <inki.dae@samsung.com> Cc: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c | 3 ++- drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_dmabuf.c | 23 +---------------------- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c | 13 +------------ include/drm/drmP.h | 1 + 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)