Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] Changing vma->vm_file in dma_buf_mmap()

[Daniel Vetter]

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 9:11 AM Christian König
<christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Am 17.09.20 um 08:23 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 5:31 PM Christian König
> > <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Am 16.09.20 um 17:24 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 4:14 PM Christian König
> >>> <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> Am 16.09.20 um 16:07 schrieb Jason Gunthorpe:
> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:53:59AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> But within the driver, we generally need thousands of these, and that
> >>>>>> 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.
> >>>>> Are they still unique struct files? Just without a fdno?
> >>>> Yes, exactly.
> >>> Not entirely, since dma-buf happened after drm chardev, so for that
> >>> 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.
> >> Hui? Ok that is just the handling in i915, isn't it?
> >>
> >> As far as I know we create an unique struct file for each DMA-buf.
> > Yes dma-buf, but that gets forwarded to the original drm chardev which
> > originally exported the buffer. It's only there where the forwarding
> > chain stops. The other thing is that iirc we have a singleton
> > anon_inode behind all the dma-buf, so they'd share all the same
> > address_space and so would all alias for unmap_mapping_range (I think
> > at least).
>
> Amdgpu works by using the address_space of the drm chardev into the
> struct file of DMA-buf instead.
>
> I think that this is cleaner, but only by a little bit :)

Yeah, but it doesn't work when forwarding from the drm chardev to the
dma-buf on the importer side, since you'd need a ton of different
address spaces. And you still rely on the core code picking up your
pgoff mangling, which feels about as risky to me as the vma file
pointer wrangling - if it's not consistently applied the reverse map
is toast and unmap_mapping_range doesn't work correctly for our needs.

> Anyway I'm a bit concerned that we have so many different approaches for
> the same problem.

Yeah, I think if we can standardize this then that would be really good.
-Daniel

>
> Christian.
>
> > -Daniel
> >
> >> Regards,
> >> Christian.
> >>
> >>
> >>> -Daniel
> >>>
> >>>>>> Hence why we'd like to be able to forward aliasing mappings and adjust the
> >>>>>> file and pgoff, while hopefully everything keeps working. I thought this
> >>>>>> would work, but Christian noticed it doesn't really.
> >>>>> It seems reasonable to me that the dma buf should be the owner of the
> >>>>> 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?
> >>>> To clarify I think this might 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Christian.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Jason
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> dri-devel mailing list
> >>>> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdri-devel&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cf725d2eb6a5a49bd533f08d85ad23308%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637359206142262941&amp;sdata=qcLsl9R1gP%2FGY39ctsQkIzI99Bn%2F840YS17F4xudrAE%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >>>
> >
>


-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch