Adding upstream version 6.1.76.upstream/6.1.76upstream

Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>

1 files changed, 348 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/dma-buf.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/dma-buf.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..36a76cbe9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/dma-buf.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,348 @@
+Buffer Sharing and Synchronization
+==================================
+
+The dma-buf subsystem provides the framework for sharing buffers for
+hardware (DMA) access across multiple device drivers and subsystems, and
+for synchronizing asynchronous hardware access.
+
+This is used, for example, by drm "prime" multi-GPU support, but is of
+course not limited to GPU use cases.
+
+The three main components of this are: (1) dma-buf, representing a
+sg_table and exposed to userspace as a file descriptor to allow passing
+between devices, (2) fence, which provides a mechanism to signal when
+one device has finished access, and (3) reservation, which manages the
+shared or exclusive fence(s) associated with the buffer.
+
+Shared DMA Buffers
+------------------
+
+This document serves as a guide to device-driver writers on what is the dma-buf
+buffer sharing API, how to use it for exporting and using shared buffers.
+
+Any device driver which wishes to be a part of DMA buffer sharing, can do so as
+either the 'exporter' of buffers, or the 'user' or 'importer' of buffers.
+
+Say a driver A wants to use buffers created by driver B, then we call B as the
+exporter, and A as buffer-user/importer.
+
+The exporter
+
+ - implements and manages operations in :c:type:`struct dma_buf_ops
+   <dma_buf_ops>` for the buffer,
+ - allows other users to share the buffer by using dma_buf sharing APIs,
+ - manages the details of buffer allocation, wrapped in a :c:type:`struct
+   dma_buf <dma_buf>`,
+ - decides about the actual backing storage where this allocation happens,
+ - and takes care of any migration of scatterlist - for all (shared) users of
+   this buffer.
+
+The buffer-user
+
+ - is one of (many) sharing users of the buffer.
+ - doesn't need to worry about how the buffer is allocated, or where.
+ - and needs a mechanism to get access to the scatterlist that makes up this
+   buffer in memory, mapped into its own address space, so it can access the
+   same area of memory. This interface is provided by :c:type:`struct
+   dma_buf_attachment <dma_buf_attachment>`.
+
+Any exporters or users of the dma-buf buffer sharing framework must have a
+'select DMA_SHARED_BUFFER' in their respective Kconfigs.
+
+Userspace Interface Notes
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Mostly a DMA buffer file descriptor is simply an opaque object for userspace,
+and hence the generic interface exposed is very minimal. There's a few things to
+consider though:
+
+- Since kernel 3.12 the dma-buf FD supports the llseek system call, but only
+  with offset=0 and whence=SEEK_END|SEEK_SET. SEEK_SET is supported to allow
+  the usual size discover pattern size = SEEK_END(0); SEEK_SET(0). Every other
+  llseek operation will report -EINVAL.
+
+  If llseek on dma-buf FDs isn't support the kernel will report -ESPIPE for all
+  cases. Userspace can use this to detect support for discovering the dma-buf
+  size using llseek.
+
+- In order to avoid fd leaks on exec, the FD_CLOEXEC flag must be set
+  on the file descriptor.  This is not just a resource leak, but a
+  potential security hole.  It could give the newly exec'd application
+  access to buffers, via the leaked fd, to which it should otherwise
+  not be permitted access.
+
+  The problem with doing this via a separate fcntl() call, versus doing it
+  atomically when the fd is created, is that this is inherently racy in a
+  multi-threaded app[3].  The issue is made worse when it is library code
+  opening/creating the file descriptor, as the application may not even be
+  aware of the fd's.
+
+  To avoid this problem, userspace must have a way to request O_CLOEXEC
+  flag be set when the dma-buf fd is created.  So any API provided by
+  the exporting driver to create a dmabuf fd must provide a way to let
+  userspace control setting of O_CLOEXEC flag passed in to dma_buf_fd().
+
+- Memory mapping the contents of the DMA buffer is also supported. See the
+  discussion below on `CPU Access to DMA Buffer Objects`_ for the full details.
+
+- The DMA buffer FD is also pollable, see `Implicit Fence Poll Support`_ below for
+  details.
+
+- The DMA buffer FD also supports a few dma-buf-specific ioctls, see
+  `DMA Buffer ioctls`_ below for details.
+
+Basic Operation and Device DMA Access
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
+   :doc: dma buf device access
+
+CPU Access to DMA Buffer Objects
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
+   :doc: cpu access
+
+Implicit Fence Poll Support
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
+   :doc: implicit fence polling
+
+DMA-BUF statistics
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf-sysfs-stats.c
+   :doc: overview
+
+DMA Buffer ioctls
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/uapi/linux/dma-buf.h
+
+Kernel Functions and Structures Reference
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
+   :export:
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/dma-buf.h
+   :internal:
+
+Reservation Objects
+-------------------
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
+   :doc: Reservation Object Overview
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
+   :export:
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/dma-resv.h
+   :internal:
+
+DMA Fences
+----------
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
+   :doc: DMA fences overview
+
+DMA Fence Cross-Driver Contract
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
+   :doc: fence cross-driver contract
+
+DMA Fence Signalling Annotations
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
+   :doc: fence signalling annotation
+
+DMA Fences Functions Reference
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
+   :export:
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/dma-fence.h
+   :internal:
+
+DMA Fence Array
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
+   :export:
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/dma-fence-array.h
+   :internal:
+
+DMA Fence Chain
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c
+   :export:
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/dma-fence-chain.h
+   :internal:
+
+DMA Fence unwrap
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/dma-fence-unwrap.h
+   :internal:
+
+DMA Fence uABI/Sync File
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+.. kernel-doc:: drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
+   :export:
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/sync_file.h
+   :internal:
+
+Indefinite DMA Fences
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+At various times struct dma_fence with an indefinite time until dma_fence_wait()
+finishes have been proposed. Examples include:
+
+* Future fences, used in HWC1 to signal when a buffer isn't used by the display
+  any longer, and created with the screen update that makes the buffer visible.
+  The time this fence completes is entirely under userspace's control.
+
+* Proxy fences, proposed to handle &drm_syncobj for which the fence has not yet
+  been set. Used to asynchronously delay command submission.
+
+* Userspace fences or gpu futexes, fine-grained locking within a command buffer
+  that userspace uses for synchronization across engines or with the CPU, which
+  are then imported as a DMA fence for integration into existing winsys
+  protocols.
+
+* Long-running compute command buffers, while still using traditional end of
+  batch DMA fences for memory management instead of context preemption DMA
+  fences which get reattached when the compute job is rescheduled.
+
+Common to all these schemes is that userspace controls the dependencies of these
+fences and controls when they fire. Mixing indefinite fences with normal
+in-kernel DMA fences does not work, even when a fallback timeout is included to
+protect against malicious userspace:
+
+* Only the kernel knows about all DMA fence dependencies, userspace is not aware
+  of dependencies injected due to memory management or scheduler decisions.
+
+* Only userspace knows about all dependencies in indefinite fences and when
+  exactly they will complete, the kernel has no visibility.
+
+Furthermore the kernel has to be able to hold up userspace command submission
+for memory management needs, which means we must support indefinite fences being
+dependent upon DMA fences. If the kernel also support indefinite fences in the
+kernel like a DMA fence, like any of the above proposal would, there is the
+potential for deadlocks.
+
+.. kernel-render:: DOT
+   :alt: Indefinite Fencing Dependency Cycle
+   :caption: Indefinite Fencing Dependency Cycle
+
+   digraph "Fencing Cycle" {
+      node [shape=box bgcolor=grey style=filled]
+      kernel [label="Kernel DMA Fences"]
+      userspace [label="userspace controlled fences"]
+      kernel -> userspace [label="memory management"]
+      userspace -> kernel [label="Future fence, fence proxy, ..."]
+
+      { rank=same; kernel userspace }
+   }
+
+This means that the kernel might accidentally create deadlocks
+through memory management dependencies which userspace is unaware of, which
+randomly hangs workloads until the timeout kicks in. Workloads, which from
+userspace's perspective, do not contain a deadlock.  In such a mixed fencing
+architecture there is no single entity with knowledge of all dependencies.
+Thefore preventing such deadlocks from within the kernel is not possible.
+
+The only solution to avoid dependencies loops is by not allowing indefinite
+fences in the kernel. This means:
+
+* No future fences, proxy fences or userspace fences imported as DMA fences,
+  with or without a timeout.
+
+* No DMA fences that signal end of batchbuffer for command submission where
+  userspace is allowed to use userspace fencing or long running compute
+  workloads. This also means no implicit fencing for shared buffers in these
+  cases.
+
+Recoverable Hardware Page Faults Implications
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Modern hardware supports recoverable page faults, which has a lot of
+implications for DMA fences.
+
+First, a pending page fault obviously holds up the work that's running on the
+accelerator and a memory allocation is usually required to resolve the fault.
+But memory allocations are not allowed to gate completion of DMA fences, which
+means any workload using recoverable page faults cannot use DMA fences for
+synchronization. Synchronization fences controlled by userspace must be used
+instead.
+
+On GPUs this poses a problem, because current desktop compositor protocols on
+Linux rely on DMA fences, which means without an entirely new userspace stack
+built on top of userspace fences, they cannot benefit from recoverable page
+faults. Specifically this means implicit synchronization will not be possible.
+The exception is when page faults are only used as migration hints and never to
+on-demand fill a memory request. For now this means recoverable page
+faults on GPUs are limited to pure compute workloads.
+
+Furthermore GPUs usually have shared resources between the 3D rendering and
+compute side, like compute units or command submission engines. If both a 3D
+job with a DMA fence and a compute workload using recoverable page faults are
+pending they could deadlock:
+
+- The 3D workload might need to wait for the compute job to finish and release
+  hardware resources first.
+
+- The compute workload might be stuck in a page fault, because the memory
+  allocation is waiting for the DMA fence of the 3D workload to complete.
+
+There are a few options to prevent this problem, one of which drivers need to
+ensure:
+
+- Compute workloads can always be preempted, even when a page fault is pending
+  and not yet repaired. Not all hardware supports this.
+
+- DMA fence workloads and workloads which need page fault handling have
+  independent hardware resources to guarantee forward progress. This could be
+  achieved through e.g. through dedicated engines and minimal compute unit
+  reservations for DMA fence workloads.
+
+- The reservation approach could be further refined by only reserving the
+  hardware resources for DMA fence workloads when they are in-flight. This must
+  cover the time from when the DMA fence is visible to other threads up to
+  moment when fence is completed through dma_fence_signal().
+
+- As a last resort, if the hardware provides no useful reservation mechanics,
+  all workloads must be flushed from the GPU when switching between jobs
+  requiring DMA fences or jobs requiring page fault handling: This means all DMA
+  fences must complete before a compute job with page fault handling can be
+  inserted into the scheduler queue. And vice versa, before a DMA fence can be
+  made visible anywhere in the system, all compute workloads must be preempted
+  to guarantee all pending GPU page faults are flushed.
+
+- Only a fairly theoretical option would be to untangle these dependencies when
+  allocating memory to repair hardware page faults, either through separate
+  memory blocks or runtime tracking of the full dependency graph of all DMA
+  fences. This results very wide impact on the kernel, since resolving the page
+  on the CPU side can itself involve a page fault. It is much more feasible and
+  robust to limit the impact of handling hardware page faults to the specific
+  driver.
+
+Note that workloads that run on independent hardware like copy engines or other
+GPUs do not have any impact. This allows us to keep using DMA fences internally
+in the kernel even for resolving hardware page faults, e.g. by using copy
+engines to clear or copy memory needed to resolve the page fault.
+
+In some ways this page fault problem is a special case of the `Infinite DMA
+Fences` discussions: Infinite fences from compute workloads are allowed to
+depend on DMA fences, but not the other way around. And not even the page fault
+problem is new, because some other CPU thread in userspace might
+hit a page fault which holds up a userspace fence - supporting page faults on
+GPUs doesn't anything fundamentally new.