Thread (23 messages) 23 messages, 10 authors, 2021-02-05

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dma-buf: heaps: Map system heap pages as managed by linux vm

From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Date: 2021-02-03 19:54:35
Also in: dri-devel, linux-mm, lkml

On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 12:06 AM Christian König
[off-list ref] wrote:
Am 03.02.21 um 03:02 schrieb Suren Baghdasaryan:
quoted
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 5:39 PM Minchan Kim [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 04:31:34PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
quoted
Currently system heap maps its buffers with VM_PFNMAP flag using
remap_pfn_range. This results in such buffers not being accounted
for in PSS calculations because vm treats this memory as having no
page structs. Without page structs there are no counters representing
how many processes are mapping a page and therefore PSS calculation
is impossible.
Historically, ION driver used to map its buffers as VM_PFNMAP areas
due to memory carveouts that did not have page structs [1]. That
is not the case anymore and it seems there was desire to move away
from remap_pfn_range [2].
Dmabuf system heap design inherits this ION behavior and maps its
pages using remap_pfn_range even though allocated pages are backed
by page structs.
Replace remap_pfn_range with vm_insert_page, following Laura's suggestion
in [1]. This would allow correct PSS calculation for dmabufs.

[1] https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdriverdev-devel.linuxdriverproject.narkive.com%2Fv0fJGpaD%2Fusing-ion-memory-for-direct-io&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cb4c145b86dd0472c943c08d8c7e7ba4b%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637479145389160353%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=W1N%2B%2BlcFDaRSvXdSPe5hPNMRByHfGkU7Uc3cmM3FCTU%3D&amp;reserved=0
[2] https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdriverdev.linuxdriverproject.org%2Fpipermail%2Fdriverdev-devel%2F2018-October%2F127519.html&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cb4c145b86dd0472c943c08d8c7e7ba4b%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637479145389160353%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=jQxSzKEr52lUcAIx%2FuBHMJ7yOgof%2FVMlW9%2BB2f%2FoS%2FE%3D&amp;reserved=0
(sorry, could not find lore links for these discussions)

Suggested-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>

A note: This patch makes dmabuf system heap accounted as PSS so
if someone has relies on the size, they will see the bloat.
IIRC, there was some debate whether PSS accounting for their
buffer is correct or not. If it'd be a problem, we need to
discuss how to solve it(maybe, vma->vm_flags and reintroduce
remap_pfn_range for them to be respected).
I did not see debates about not including *mapped* dmabufs into PSS
calculation. I remember people were discussing how to account dmabufs
referred only by the FD but that is a different discussion. If the
buffer is mapped into the address space of a process then IMHO
including it into PSS of that process is not controversial.
Well, I think it is. And to be honest this doesn't looks like a good
idea to me since it will eventually lead to double accounting of system
heap DMA-bufs.
Thanks for the comment! Could you please expand on this double
accounting issue? Do you mean userspace could double account dmabufs
because it expects dmabufs not to be part of PSS or is there some
in-kernel accounting mechanism that would be broken by this?
As discussed multiple times it is illegal to use the struct page of a
DMA-buf. This case here is a bit special since it is the owner of the
pages which does that, but I'm not sure if this won't cause problems
elsewhere as well.
I would be happy to keep things as they are but calculating dmabuf
contribution to PSS without struct pages is extremely inefficient and
becomes a real pain when we consider the possibilities of partial
mappings, when not the entire dmabuf is being mapped.
Calculating this would require parsing /proc/pid/maps for the process,
finding dmabuf mappings and the size for each one, then parsing
/proc/pid/maps for ALL processes in the system to see if the same
dmabufs are used by other processes and only then calculating the PSS.
I hope that explains the desire to use already existing struct pages
to obtain PSS in a much more efficient way.
A more appropriate solution would be to held processes accountable for
resources they have allocated through device drivers.
Are you suggesting some new kernel mechanism to account resources
allocated by a process via a driver? If so, any details?
Regards,
Christian.

--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kernel-team+unsubscribe@android.com.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help