On 1/22/2024 7:34 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:29:41 -0500
"Bhardwaj, Rajneesh" <rajneesh.bhardwaj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
In one of my previous revisions of this patch when I was experimenting,
I used something like below. Wonder if that could work in your case
and/or in general.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_device.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_device.c
index 43e27ab77f95..4c3902b94be4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_device.c
@@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ int ttm_device_init(struct ttm_device *bdev, struct
ttm_device_funcs *funcs,
bool use_dma_alloc, bool use_dma32){
struct ttm_global *glob = &ttm_glob;
+bool node_has_cpu = false;
int ret;
if (WARN_ON(vma_manager == NULL))
@@ -213,7 +214,12 @@ int ttm_device_init(struct ttm_device *bdev, struct
ttm_device_funcs *funcs,
bdev->funcs = funcs;
ttm_sys_man_init(bdev);
-ttm_pool_init(&bdev->pool, dev, NUMA_NO_NODE, use_dma_alloc, use_dma32);
+
+node_has_cpu = node_state(dev->numa_node, N_CPU);
Considering that qxl_ttm_init() passes in dev = NULL, the above would blow
up just the same.
I agree, I think we need something like you suggested i.e.
+ ttm_pool_init(&bdev->pool, dev, dev ? dev_to_node(dev) : NUMA_NO_NODE,
+ use_dma_alloc, use_dma32);
I am not quite sure if the above node_has_cpu change will be a better
solution in general, along with the NULL pointer check as you suggested.
If you prefer that, then I can send a fix otherwise, your fix looks good
to me.
-- Steve
+if (node_has_cpu)
+ttm_pool_init(&bdev->pool, dev, dev->numa_node, use_dma_alloc, use_dma32);
+else
+ttm_pool_init(&bdev->pool, dev, NUMA_NO_NODE, use_dma_alloc,
+use_dma32);
bdev->vma_manager = vma_manager;
spin_lock_init(&bdev->lru_lock);
-- Steve
