On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:49:57PM -0500, Faith Ekstrand wrote:
On Fri, 2023-03-10 at 07:16 +0900, Asahi Lina wrote:
On 10/03/2023 06.16, Faith Ekstrand wrote:
On Tue, 2023-03-07 at 23:25 +0900, Asahi Lina wrote:
A DRM File is the DRM counterpart to a kernel file structure, representing an open DRM file descriptor. Add a Rust abstraction to allow drivers to implement their own File types that implement the DriverFile trait.
Signed-off-by: Asahi Lina lina@asahilina.net
rust/bindings/bindings_helper.h | 1 + rust/kernel/drm/drv.rs | 7 ++- rust/kernel/drm/file.rs | 113 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ rust/kernel/drm/mod.rs | 1 + 4 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/rust/bindings/bindings_helper.h b/rust/bindings/bindings_helper.h index 2a999138c4ae..7d7828faf89c 100644 --- a/rust/bindings/bindings_helper.h +++ b/rust/bindings/bindings_helper.h @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ #include <drm/drm_device.h> #include <drm/drm_drv.h> +#include <drm/drm_file.h> #include <drm/drm_ioctl.h> #include <linux/delay.h> #include <linux/device.h> diff --git a/rust/kernel/drm/drv.rs b/rust/kernel/drm/drv.rs index 29a465515dc9..1dcb651e1417 100644 --- a/rust/kernel/drm/drv.rs +++ b/rust/kernel/drm/drv.rs @@ -144,6 +144,9 @@ pub trait Driver { /// Should be either `drm::gem::Object<T>` or `drm::gem::shmem::Object<T>`. type Object: AllocImpl; + /// The type used to represent a DRM File (client) + type File: drm::file::DriverFile;
/// Driver metadata const INFO: DriverInfo; @@ -213,8 +216,8 @@ macro_rules! drm_device_register { impl<T: Driver> Registration<T> { const VTABLE: bindings::drm_driver = drm_legacy_fields! { load: None, - open: None, // TODO: File abstraction - postclose: None, // TODO: File abstraction + open: Some(drm::file::open_callback::<T::File>), + postclose: Some(drm::file::postclose_callback::<T::File>), lastclose: None, unload: None, release: None, diff --git a/rust/kernel/drm/file.rs b/rust/kernel/drm/file.rs new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..48751e93c38a --- /dev/null +++ b/rust/kernel/drm/file.rs @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT
+//! DRM File objects. +//! +//! C header: [`include/linux/drm/drm_file.h`](../../../../include/linux/drm/dr m_fi le.h)
+use crate::{bindings, drm, error::Result}; +use alloc::boxed::Box; +use core::marker::PhantomData; +use core::ops::Deref;
+/// Trait that must be implemented by DRM drivers to represent a DRM File (a client instance). +pub trait DriverFile { + /// The parent `Driver` implementation for this `DriverFile`. + type Driver: drm::drv::Driver;
+ /// Open a new file (called when a client opens the DRM device). + fn open(device: &drm::device::DeviceSelf::Driver) -> Result<Box<Self>>; +}
+/// An open DRM File. +/// +/// # Invariants +/// `raw` is a valid pointer to a `drm_file` struct. +#[repr(transparent)] +pub struct File<T: DriverFile> { + raw: *mut bindings::drm_file, + _p: PhantomData<T>, +}
+pub(super) unsafe extern "C" fn open_callback<T: DriverFile>( + raw_dev: *mut bindings::drm_device, + raw_file: *mut bindings::drm_file, +) -> core::ffi::c_int { + let drm = core::mem::ManuallyDrop::new(unsafe { drm::device::Device::from_raw(raw_dev) });
Maybe you can help educate me a bit here... This feels like a really sketchy pattern. We're creating a Device from a pointer, an operation which inherently consumes a reference but then marking it ManuallyDrop so drm_device_put() never gets called. It took me a while but I think I figured out what you're trying to do: Make it so all the Rust stuff works with Device, not drm_device but it still feels really wrong. It works, it just feels like there's a lot of unsafe abstraction juggling happening here and I expect this operation is going to be pretty common in the Rust abstraction layer.
So I think this is going to be a pretty common pattern in this kind of abstraction. The problem is that, of course, in C there is no distinction between an owned reference and a borrowed one. Here we have a borrowed reference to a struct drm_device, and we need to turn it into a &Device (which is the Rust equivalent type). But for &Device to exist we need a Device to exist in the first place, and Device normally implies ownership of the underlying drm_device.
Thanks! Putting it in terms of borrow really helps clear up the difference.
We could just acquire a reference here, but then we're needlessly grabbing a ref only to drop it at the end of the function, which is pointless when the caller is holding another reference for us while the callback runs. And of course Rust likes to claim to offer zero-cost abstractions, so it would be kind of sad to have to do that... ^^
Yeah, I agree we don't want to take extra references.
Just doing drm::device::Device::from_raw(raw_dev) is a ticking time bomb, because we haven't acquired a reference (which would normally be required). If that Device ever gets dropped, we've messed up the refcounting and stolen the caller's reference. We could try to ensure it gets passed to core::mem::forget in all paths out, but that gets error-prone very quickly when trying to cover error paths. So instead, we put it into a ManuallyDrop. That takes care of neutering the ref drop, so we don't have to worry about messing that up. Then the only remaining safety requirement is that that the ManuallyDrop<Device> never escape the callback function, and that's easy to ensure: we only pass a &ref to the user (which via auto-deref ends up being a &Device), and then nothing bad can happen. If the user wants an owned reference to the device to keep around, they can call .clone() on it and that's when the incref happens.
Basically, ManuallyDrop<T> where T is a reference counted type represents a borrowed reference to a T coming from the C side. You can see another use of this pattern in gem::Object, which contains a ManuallyDrop<Device> that represents a borrowed reference to the device that owns that object. The DRM core (as far as I know!) guarantees that DRM devices outlive all of their GEM objects, so we can materialize a borrowed reference and as long as it never leaves the GEM object, it will be sound. Then we can take &Device references from it whenever we want, and the usual Rust borrow checker rules ensure we can't do something illegal.
Ok, that all matches my understanding of what I thought was going on. I do wonder if it would be good to wrap this up in a
struct DeviceBorrow { dev: ManuallyDrop<Device> }
impl DeviceBorrow { pub unsafe fn from_raw(*mut bindings::drm_device) -> DeviceBorrow; }
impl Deref<Device> for DeviceBorrow { ... }
with documentation, etc. Seeing a ManuallyDrop which is never dropped sets my rust senses tingling. Maybe that's too much typing for each object? I don't want to add a bunch of extra work but this seems like a pretty common pattern we're going to hit everywhere.
I just want to mention, there is a different way to do the abstraction here:
similar to https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/ZA9l0EHCRRr%2Fmyoq@boqun-archlinux
* Define Device as tranparent represention of struct drm_device:
#[repr(transparent)] struct Device(Opaquebindings::drm_device);
* impl `AlwaysRefCounted`[1] for `Device`, therefore we can use `ARef<Device>`[2] as a smart pointer to `drm_device`.
* drm_device related methods are still implemented in `impl Device`
* In `open_callback`, we can just get a `&Device` from `*mut bindings::drm_device` unsafely, and that's all. Or introduce a helper function if we want:
pub unsafe fn with_device<F>(ptr: *mut drm_device, f: F) -> Result where F: FnOnce(&Device) -> Result { let d = unsafe { &*ptr }; f(d) }
The main difference is that we now treat a pointer to drm_device as a reference to the device, not the owner.
It seems we need to also change our driver/device framework to use this approach, but it looks better to me.
Regards, Boqun
[1]: https://rust-for-linux.github.io/docs/kernel/trait.AlwaysRefCounted.html [2]: https://rust-for-linux.github.io/docs/kernel/struct.ARef.html
~Faith