On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 02:57:46PM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 10:55 AM Danilo Krummrich <d...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Anyways, I don't agree with that. Even if you can tweak your driver to not
> > run
> > into trouble with this, we can't introduce a mode that violates GOUVM's
> > internal
> > lifetimes and subsequently fix it up with WARN_ON() or BUG_ON().
> >
> > I still don't see a real technical reason why msm can't be reworked to
> > follow
> > those lifetime rules.
>
> The basic issue is that (a) it would be really awkward to have two
> side-by-side VM/VMA management/tracking systems. But in legacy mode,
> we have the opposite direction of reference holding. (But at the same
> time, don't need/use most of the features of gpuvm.)
Ok, let's try to move this forward; I see three options (in order of descending
preference):
1) Rework the legacy code to properly work with GPUVM.
2) Don't use GPUVM for the legacy mode.
.
.
.
3) Get an ACK from Dave / Sima to implement those workarounds for MSM in
GPUVM.
If you go for 3), the code introduced by those two patches should be guarded
with a flag that makes it very clear that this is a workaround specifically
for MSM legacy mode and does not give any guarantees in terms of correctness
regarding lifetimes etc., e.g. DRM_GPUVM_MSM_LEGACY_QUIRK.
- Danilo
