On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 4:14 PM Christian König
Am 16.09.20 um 16:07 schrieb Jason Gunthorpe:Not entirely, since dma-buf happened after drm chardev, so for that
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:53:59AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:Yes, exactly.
But within the driver, we generally need thousands of these, and thatAre they still unique struct files? Just without a fdno?
tends to bring fd exhaustion problems with it. That's why all the private
buffer objects which aren't shared with other process or other drivers are
handles only valid for a specific fd instance of the drm chardev (each
open gets their own namespace), and only for ioctls done on that chardev.
And for mmap we assign fake (but unique across all open fd on it) offsets
within the overall chardev. Hence all the pgoff mangling and re-mangling.
historical reason the underlying struct file is shared, since it's the
drm chardev. But since that's per-device we don't have a problem in
practice with different vm_ops, since those are also per-device. But
yeah we could fish out some entirely hidden per-object struct file if
that's required for some mm internal reasons.
To clarify I think this might work.Hence why we'd like to be able to forward aliasing mappings and adjust theIt seems reasonable to me that the dma buf should be the owner of the
file and pgoff, while hopefully everything keeps working. I thought this
would work, but Christian noticed it doesn't really.
VMA, otherwise like you say, there is a big mess attaching the custom
vma ops and what not to the proper dma buf.
I don't see anything obviously against this in mmap_region() - why did
Chritian notice it doesn't really work?
I just had the same "Is that legal?", "What about security?", etc..
questions you raised as well.
It seems like a source of trouble so I thought better ask somebody more
familiar with that.
dri-devel mailing list