Am 13.04.21 um 17:54 schrieb Matthew Auld:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 14:52, Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Change a couple of cases where it makes more sense to use the base size instead of the number of pages in the resource. Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c | 9 ++++----- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fbcon.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_gem.c | 4 ++-- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c index 2d5d68fc15c2..6dbcbe2fa55f 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c @@ -302,7 +302,6 @@ nouveau_bo_init(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo, u64 size, int align, u32 domain, int type = sg ? ttm_bo_type_sg : ttm_bo_type_device; int ret; - nvbo->bo.mem.num_pages = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;So this was redundant, since ttm_bo_init_reserved() already did this for us?
No, this is redundant since we now use base.size in the functions called by nouveau_bo_placement_set().
Since base.size is already initialized here we should be able to safely drop this.
nouveau_bo_placement_set(nvbo, domain, 0); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nvbo->io_reserve_lru); @@ -364,12 +363,12 @@ static void set_placement_range(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo, uint32_t domain) { struct nouveau_drm *drm = nouveau_bdev(nvbo->bo.bdev); - u32 vram_pages = drm->client.device.info.ram_size >> PAGE_SHIFT; + u64 vram_size = drm->client.device.info.ram_size; unsigned i, fpfn, lpfn; if (drm->client.device.info.family == NV_DEVICE_INFO_V0_CELSIUS && nvbo->mode && (domain & NOUVEAU_GEM_DOMAIN_VRAM) && - nvbo->bo.mem.num_pages < vram_pages / 4) { + nvbo->bo.base.size < vram_size / 4) { /* * Make sure that the color and depth buffers are handled * by independent memory controller units. Up to a 9x @@ -377,11 +376,11 @@ set_placement_range(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo, uint32_t domain) * at the same time. */ if (nvbo->zeta) { - fpfn = vram_pages / 2; + fpfn = (vram_size / 2) >> PAGE_SHIFT; lpfn = ~0; } else { fpfn = 0; - lpfn = vram_pages / 2; + lpfn = (vram_size / 2) >> PAGE_SHIFT; } for (i = 0; i < nvbo->placement.num_placement; ++i) { nvbo->placements[i].fpfn = fpfn; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fbcon.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fbcon.c index 4fc0fa696461..93ac78bda750 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fbcon.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fbcon.c @@ -379,10 +379,10 @@ nouveau_fbcon_create(struct drm_fb_helper *helper, FBINFO_HWACCEL_IMAGEBLIT; info->fbops = &nouveau_fbcon_sw_ops; info->fix.smem_start = nvbo->bo.mem.bus.offset; - info->fix.smem_len = nvbo->bo.mem.num_pages << PAGE_SHIFT; + info->fix.smem_len = nvbo->bo.base.size;Is byte level granularity a thing in general?
Yes, on AMD GPUs we have resources which must be managed in bytes or even arbitrary units like blocks of registers for example.
I would have assumed that base.size is always aligned to PAGE_SIZE or whatever? At least in ttm_bo_init_reserved() we first align the size and then calculate the num_pages, so not sure. Hopefully this is not a concern, and should be equivalent.
Yes currently the size should always be aligned to a page, but that is exactly what I want to get away from.
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks, Christian. _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
