Re: TTM or vmwgfx tree? Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] mm, drm/ttm: Fix pte insertion with customized protection

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Am 15.01.20 um 13:45 schrieb Thomas Hellström (VMware):
Hi Christian,

On 1/15/20 1:41 PM, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
From: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx>

The drm/ttm module is using a modified on-stack copy of the
struct vm_area_struct to be able to set a page protection with customized
caching. Fix that by adding a vmf_insert_mixed_prot() function similar
to the existing vmf_insert_pfn_prot() for use with drm/ttm.

Patches are acked to be merged through a drm tree.

This small patchset should be ready to be merged now, with acks from Andrew.

Do you want to take it through the ttm tree, or should I ask Dave / Daniel to pull it separately?

Note that similar to the vmwgfx coherent patches, Linus has indicated that he wants separate pull requests for stuff like this that touches mm.

Better ask Dave in this case or merge through drm-misc-next. The later is where I push all those little cross driver cleanup patches recently and that seems to work fine.

Regards,
Christian.


Thanks,

Thomas



_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux