Quoting Rob Clark (2019-08-01 16:18:45) > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 5:40 AM Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Quoting Sean Paul (2019-07-31 20:23:31) > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:21:53AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 02:15:37PM -0700, Rob Clark wrote: > > > > > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > drm_cflush_pages() is no-op on arm/arm64. But instead we can use > > > > > dma_sync API. > > > > > > > > > > Fixes failures w/ vgem_test. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > An alternative approach to the series[1] I sent yesterday > > > > > > > > > > On the plus side, it keeps the WC buffers and avoids any drm core > > > > > changes. On the minus side, I don't think it will work (at least > > > > > on arm64) prior to v5.0[2], so the fix can't be backported very > > > > > far. > > > > > > > > Yeah seems a lot more reasonable. > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Applied to drm-misc-fixes, thanks! > > > > But it didn't actually fix the failures in CI. > > Hmm, that is unfortunate, I'd assumed that silence meant latest > version was working in CI.. Ah, takes a intel-gfx@ for CI to pick up patches atm. > dma_sync_sg_* doesn't work on x86? It would be kinda unfortunate to > have vgem only work on x86 *or* arm.. maybe bringing back > drm_cflush_pages() could make it work in both cases I think it stems from the expectation that vgem provides "device coherency" for CPU access. From the testing perspective, it's nice to emulate HW interactions; but maybe that is just beyond the general capabilities and we cannot simply use vgem as we do currently. That would leave a hole for mocking prime in CI that needs filling :( -Chris _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
