Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v4 4/8] drm/gpuvm: add common dma-resv per struct drm_gpuvm

[Christian König]

Am 20.09.23 um 16:42 schrieb Danilo Krummrich:
> Provide a common dma-resv for GEM objects not being used outside of this
> GPU-VM. This is used in a subsequent patch to generalize dma-resv,
> external and evicted object handling and GEM validation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gpuvm.c            |  9 +++++++--
>   drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_uvmm.c |  2 +-
>   include/drm/drm_gpuvm.h                | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>   3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gpuvm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gpuvm.c
> index bfea4a8a19ec..cbf4b738a16c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gpuvm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gpuvm.c
> @@ -655,6 +655,7 @@ drm_gpuva_range_valid(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm,
>   /**
>    * drm_gpuvm_init() - initialize a &drm_gpuvm
>    * @gpuvm: pointer to the &drm_gpuvm to initialize
> + * @drm: the drivers &drm_device
>    * @name: the name of the GPU VA space
>    * @start_offset: the start offset of the GPU VA space
>    * @range: the size of the GPU VA space
> @@ -668,7 +669,7 @@ drm_gpuva_range_valid(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm,
>    * &name is expected to be managed by the surrounding driver structures.
>    */
>   void
> -drm_gpuvm_init(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm,
> +drm_gpuvm_init(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm, struct drm_device *drm,
>   	       const char *name,
>   	       u64 start_offset, u64 range,
>   	       u64 reserve_offset, u64 reserve_range,
> @@ -694,6 +695,8 @@ drm_gpuvm_init(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm,
>   						     reserve_range)))
>   			__drm_gpuva_insert(gpuvm, &gpuvm->kernel_alloc_node);
>   	}
> +
> +	drm_gem_private_object_init(drm, &gpuvm->d_obj, 0);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drm_gpuvm_init);
>   
> @@ -713,7 +716,9 @@ drm_gpuvm_destroy(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm)
>   		__drm_gpuva_remove(&gpuvm->kernel_alloc_node);
>   
>   	WARN(!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&gpuvm->rb.tree.rb_root),
> -	     "GPUVA tree is not empty, potentially leaking memory.");
> +	     "GPUVA tree is not empty, potentially leaking memory.\n");
> +
> +	drm_gem_private_object_fini(&gpuvm->d_obj);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drm_gpuvm_destroy);
>   
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_uvmm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_uvmm.c
> index 6c86b64273c3..a80ac8767843 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_uvmm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_uvmm.c
> @@ -1836,7 +1836,7 @@ nouveau_uvmm_init(struct nouveau_uvmm *uvmm, struct nouveau_cli *cli,
>   	uvmm->kernel_managed_addr = kernel_managed_addr;
>   	uvmm->kernel_managed_size = kernel_managed_size;
>   
> -	drm_gpuvm_init(&uvmm->base, cli->name,
> +	drm_gpuvm_init(&uvmm->base, cli->drm->dev, cli->name,
>   		       NOUVEAU_VA_SPACE_START,
>   		       NOUVEAU_VA_SPACE_END,
>   		       kernel_managed_addr, kernel_managed_size,
> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_gpuvm.h b/include/drm/drm_gpuvm.h
> index 0e802676e0a9..6666c07d7c3e 100644
> --- a/include/drm/drm_gpuvm.h
> +++ b/include/drm/drm_gpuvm.h
> @@ -240,14 +240,29 @@ struct drm_gpuvm {
>   	 * @ops: &drm_gpuvm_ops providing the split/merge steps to drivers
>   	 */
>   	const struct drm_gpuvm_ops *ops;
> +
> +	/**
> +	 * @d_obj: Dummy GEM object; used internally to pass the GPU VMs
> +	 * dma-resv to &drm_exec. Provides the GPUVM's &dma-resv.
> +	 */
> +	struct drm_gem_object d_obj;

Yeah, as pointed out in the other mail that won't work like this.

The GPUVM contains GEM objects and therefore should probably have a 
reference to those objects.

When those GEM objects now use the dma-resv object embedded inside the 
GPUVM then they also need a reference to the GPUVM to make sure the 
dma-resv object won't be freed before they are freed.

This is a circle reference dependency.

The simplest solution I can see is to let the driver provide the GEM 
object to use. Amdgpu uses the root page directory object for this.

Apart from that I strongly think that we shouldn't let the GPUVM code 
create a driver GEM object. We did that in TTM for the ghost objects and 
it turned out to be a bad idea.

Regards,
Christian.

>   };
>   
> -void drm_gpuvm_init(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm, const char *name,
> +void drm_gpuvm_init(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm, struct drm_device *drm,
> +		    const char *name,
>   		    u64 start_offset, u64 range,
>   		    u64 reserve_offset, u64 reserve_range,
>   		    const struct drm_gpuvm_ops *ops);
>   void drm_gpuvm_destroy(struct drm_gpuvm *gpuvm);
>   
> +/**
> + * drm_gpuvm_resv() - returns the &drm_gpuvm's &dma_resv
> + * @gpuvm__: the &drm_gpuvm
> + *
> + * Returns: a pointer to the &drm_gpuvm's &dma_resv
> + */
> +#define drm_gpuvm_resv(gpuvm__) (&(gpuvm__)->d_obj._resv)
> +
>   static inline struct drm_gpuva *
>   __drm_gpuva_next(struct drm_gpuva *va)
>   {