Hi Sima,
On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 10:53:38AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 11:05:19AM +0100, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > This patch series concludes on the memory mapping fixes and
> > improvements by allowing partial memory mapping for the cpu
> > memory as well.
> >
> > The partial memory mapping by adding an object offset was
> > implicitely included in commit 8bdd9ef7e9b1 ("drm/i915/gem: Fix
> > Virtual Memory mapping boundaries calculation") for the gtt
> > memory.
>
> Does userspace actually care? Do we have a flag or something, so that
> userspace can discover this?
>
> Adding complexity of any kind is absolute no-go, unless there's a
> userspace need. This also includes the gtt accidental fix.
Actually this missing functionality was initially filed as a bug
by mesa folks. So that this patch was requested by them (Lionel
is Cc'ed).
The tests cases that have been sent previously and I'm going to
send again, are directly taken from mesa use cases.
Thanks,
Andi
