Re: [PATCH] drm/panfrost: Calculate lock region size correctly

From: Boris Brezillon
Date: Fri Sep 03 2021 - 04:51:31 EST


On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 15:00:38 +0100
Steven Price <steven.price@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> It turns out that when locking a region, the region must be a naturally
> aligned power of 2. The upshot of this is that if the desired region
> crosses a 'large boundary' the region size must be increased
> significantly to ensure that the locked region completely covers the
> desired region. Previous calculations (including in kbase for the
> proprietary driver) failed to take this into account.
>
> Since it's known that the lock region must be naturally aligned we can
> compute the required size by looking at the highest bit position which
> changes between the start/end of the lock region (subtracting 1 from the
> end because the end address is exclusive). The start address is then
> aligned based on the size (this is technically unnecessary as the
> hardware will ignore these bits, but the spec advises to do this "to
> avoid confusion").
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> See previous discussion[1] for more details. This bug also existed in
> the 'kbase' driver, so it's unlikely to actually hit very often.
>
> This patch is based on drm-misc-next-fixes as it builds on top of
> Alyssa's changes to lock_region.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/6fe675c4-d22b-22da-ba3c-f6d33419b9ed@xxxxxxx/
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c
> index dfe5f1d29763..afec15bb3db5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c
> @@ -58,17 +58,36 @@ static int write_cmd(struct panfrost_device *pfdev, u32 as_nr, u32 cmd)
> }
>
> static void lock_region(struct panfrost_device *pfdev, u32 as_nr,
> - u64 iova, u64 size)
> + u64 region_start, u64 size)
> {
> u8 region_width;
> - u64 region = iova & PAGE_MASK;
> + u64 region;
> + u64 region_size;
> + u64 region_end = region_start + size;
>
> - /* The size is encoded as ceil(log2) minus(1), which may be calculated
> - * with fls. The size must be clamped to hardware bounds.
> + if (!size)
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * The locked region is a naturally aligned power of 2 block encoded as
> + * log2 minus(1).
> + * Calculate the desired start/end and look for the highest bit which
> + * differs. The smallest naturally aligned block must include this bit
> + * change the desired region starts with this bit (and subsequent bits)
> + * zeroed and ends with the bit (and subsequent bits) set to one.
> + *

Nit: you can drop the empty comment line.

> */
> - size = max_t(u64, size, AS_LOCK_REGION_MIN_SIZE);
> - region_width = fls64(size - 1) - 1;
> - region |= region_width;
> + region_size = region_start ^ (region_end - 1);

Hm, is region_size really encoding the size of the region to lock? I
mean, the logic seems correct but I wonder if it wouldn't be better to
drop the region_size variable and inline
'region_start ^ (region_end - 1)' in the region_width calculation to
avoid confusion.

Looks good otherwise.

Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> + region_width = max(fls64(region_size),
> + const_ilog2(AS_LOCK_REGION_MIN_SIZE)) - 1;
> +
> + /*
> + * Mask off the low bits of region_start (which would be ignored by
> + * the hardware anyway)
> + */
> + region_start &= GENMASK_ULL(63, region_width);
> +
> + region = region_width | region_start;
>
> /* Lock the region that needs to be updated */
> mmu_write(pfdev, AS_LOCKADDR_LO(as_nr), region & 0xFFFFFFFFUL);