Pulling this out of the shadows again.
We now also have xen-zcopy from Oleksandr and the hyper dmabuf stuff from Matt and Dongwong.
At least from the intel side there seems to be the idea to just have 1 special device that can handle cross-gues/host sharing for all kinds of hypervisors, so I guess you all need to work together :-)
Or we throw out the idea that hyper dmabuf will be cross-hypervisor (not sure how useful/reasonable that is, someone please convince me one way or the other).
Cheers, Daniel
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Gerd Hoffmann kraxel@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Either mlock account (because it's mlocked defacto), and get_user_pages won't do that for you.
Or you write the full-blown userptr implementation, including mmu_notifier support (see i915 or amdgpu), but that also requires Christian Königs latest ->invalidate_mapping RFC for dma-buf (since atm exporting userptr buffers is a no-go).
I guess I'll look at mlock accounting for starters then. Easier for now, and leaves the door open to switch to userptr later as this should be transparent to userspace.
Known issue: Driver API isn't complete yet. Need add some flags, for example to support read-only buffers.
dma-buf has no concept of read-only. I don't think we can even enforce that (not many iommus can enforce this iirc), so pretty much need to require r/w memory.
Ah, ok. Just saw the 'write' arg for get_user_pages_fast and figured we might support that, but if iommus can't handle that anyway it's pointless indeed.
Cc: David Airlie airlied@linux.ie Cc: Tomeu Vizoso tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann kraxel@redhat.com
btw there's also the hyperdmabuf stuff from the xen folks, but imo their solution of forwarding the entire dma-buf api is over the top. This here looks _much_ better, pls cc all the hyperdmabuf people on your next version.
Fun fact: googling for "hyperdmabuf" found me your mail and nothing else :-o (Trying "hyper dmabuf" instead worked better then).
Yes, will cc them on the next version. Not sure it'll help much on xen though due to the memory management being very different. Basically xen owns the memory, not the kernel of the control domain (dom0), so creating dmabufs for guest memory chunks isn't that simple ...
Also it's not clear whenever they really need guest -> guest exports or guest -> dom0 exports.
Overall I like the idea, but too lazy to review.
Cool. General comments on the idea was all I was looking for for the moment. Spare yor review cycles for the next version ;)
Oh, some kselftests for this stuff would be lovely.
I'll look into it.
thanks, Gerd
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel