Re: [RFC 0/1] Use dmabufs for display updates instead of pixman

[Gerd Hoffmann]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 08:28:33AM +0000, Kasireddy, Vivek wrote:
> Hi Gerd,
> Sorry for the delayed response. I wanted to wait until I finished my 
> proof-of-concept --
> that included adding synchronization --  to ask follow up questions.
> 
> > >
> > > Does your work above not count for anything?
> > 
> > It is quite old, and I think not up-to-date with the final revision of the 
> > blob resource
> > specification.  I wouldn't be able to update this in near future due to 
> > being busy with other
> > projects.  Feel free to grab & update & submit these patches though.
> [Kasireddy, Vivek] Sure, we'll take a look at your work and use that as a 
> starting
> point. Roughly, how much of your work can be reused?

There are some small udmabuf support patches which can probably be
reused pretty much as-is.  Everything else needs larger changes I
suspect, but it's been a while I looked at this ...

> Also, given my limited understanding of how discrete GPUs work, I was 
> wondering how 
> many copies would there need to be with blob resources/dmabufs and whether a 
> zero-copy
> goal would be feasible or not?

Good question.

Right now there are two copies (gtk ui):

  (1) guest ram -> DisplaySurface -> gtk widget (gl=off), or
  (2) guest ram -> DisplaySurface -> texture (gl=on).

You should be able to reduce this to one copy for gl=on ...

  (3) guest ram -> texture

... by taking DisplaySurface out of the picture, without any changes to
the guest/host interface.  Drawback is that it requires adding an opengl
dependency to virtio-gpu even with virgl=off, because the virtio-gpu
device will have to handle the copy to the texture then, in response to
guest TRANSFER commands.

When adding blob resource support:

Easiest is probably supporting VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_MEM_GUEST (largely
identical to non-blob resources) with VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_FLAG_USE_SHAREABLE
(allows the host to create a shared mapping).  Then you can go create a
udmabuf for the resource on the host side.  For the non-gl code path you
can mmap() the udmabuf (which gives you a linear mapping for the
scattered guest pages) and create a DisplaySurface backed by guest ram
pages (removing the guest ram -> DisplaySurface copy).  For the gl code
path you can create a texture backed by the udmabuf and go render on the
host without copying at all.

Using VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_MEM_GUEST + VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_FLAG_USE_SHAREABLE for
resources needs guest changes too, either in mesa (when using virgl) or
the kernel driver's dumb buffer handling (when not using virgl).

Alternatively (listed more for completeness):

You can create a blob resource with VIRTGPU_BLOB_MEM_HOST3D (requires
virgl, see also virgl_drm_winsys_resource_create_blob in mesa).  It will
be allocated by the host, then mapped into the guest using a virtual pci
memory bar.  Guest userspace (aka mesa driver) can mmap() these
resources and has direct, zero-copy access to the host resource.

Going to dma-buf export that, import into i915, then let the gpu render
implies we are doing p2p dma from a physical (pci-assigned) device to
the memory bar of a virtual pci device.

Doing that should be possible, but frankly I would be surprised if that
actually works out-of-the-box.  Dunno how many dragons are lurking here.
Could become an interesting challenge to make that fly.

> > Beside the code duplication this is also a maintainance issue.  This adds 
> > one more
> > configuration to virtio-gpu.  Right now you can build virtio-gpu with virgl 
> > (depends on
> > opengl), or you can build without virgl (doesn't use opengl then).  I don't 
> > think it is a good
> > idea to add a third mode, without virgl support but using opengl for blob 
> > dma-bufs.
> [Kasireddy, Vivek] We'll have to re-visit this part but for our use-case with 
> virtio-gpu, we
> are disabling virglrenderer in Qemu and virgl DRI driver in the Guest. 
> However, we still
> need to use Opengl/EGL to convert the dmabuf (guest fb) to texture and render 
> as part of
> the UI/GTK updates. 

Well, VIRTGPU_BLOB_MEM_HOST3D blob resources are created using virgl
renderer commands (VIRGL_CCMD_PIPE_RESOURCE_CREATE).  So supporting that
without virglrenderer is not an option.

VIRTIO_GPU_BLOB_MEM_GUEST might be possible without too much effort.

> > > On a different note, any particular reason why Qemu UI EGL
> > > implementation is limited to Xorg and not extended to Wayland/Weston
> > > for which there is GTK glarea?
> > 
> > Well, ideally I'd love to just use glarea.  Which happens on wayland.
> > 
> > The problem with Xorg is that the gtk x11 backend uses glx not egl to 
> > create an opengl
> > context for glarea.  At least that used to be the case in the past, maybe 
> > that has changed
> > with newer versions.  qemu needs egl contexts though, otherwise dma-bufs 
> > don't work.  So
> > we are stuck with our own egl widget implementation for now.  Probably we 
> > will be able
> > to drop it at some point in the future.

> [Kasireddy, Vivek] GTK X11 backend still uses GLX and it seems like that is 
> not going to 
> change anytime soon.

Hmm, so the egl backend has to stay for the time being.

> Having said that, I was wondering if it makes sense to add a new
> purely Wayland backend besides GtkGlArea so that Qemu UI can more quickly 
> adopt new
> features such as explicit sync. I was thinking about the new backend being 
> similar to this:
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/tree/clients/simple-dmabuf-egl.c

I'd prefer to not do that.

> The reason why I am proposing this idea is because even if we manage to add 
> explicit 
> sync support to GTK and it gets merged, upgrading Qemu GTK support from 3.22 
> to > 4.x may prove to be daunting. Currently, the way I am doing explicit 
> sync is
> by adding these new APIs to GTK and calling them from Qemu:

Well, we had the same code supporting gtk2+3 with #ifdefs.  There are
also #ifdefs to avoid using functions deprecated during 3.x lifetime.
So I expect porting to gtk4 wouldn't be too bad.

Also I expect qemu wouldn't be the only application needing sync
support, so trying to get that integrated with upstream gtk certainly
makes sense.

> Lastly, on a different note, I noticed that there is a virtio-gpu Windows 
> driver here:
> https://github.com/virtio-win/kvm-guest-drivers-windows/tree/master/viogpu
> 
> We are going to try it out but do you know how up to date it is kept?

No, not following development closely.

take care,
  Gerd