On 7/3/2016 5:51 PM, Goel, Akash wrote:
On 7/3/2016 2:45 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 12:21:22AM +0530, akash.goel@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
+static void guc_read_update_log_buffer(struct drm_device *dev, bool
capture_all)
+{
+ struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
+ struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
+ struct guc_log_buffer_state *log_buffer_state;
+ struct guc_log_buffer_state *log_buffer_copy_state;
+ void *src_ptr, *dst_ptr;
+ u32 num_pages_to_copy;
+ int i;
+
+ if (!guc->log.obj)
+ return;
+
+ num_pages_to_copy = guc->log.obj->base.size / PAGE_SIZE;
+ /* Don't really need to copy crash buffer area in regular cases
as there
+ * won't be any unread data there.
+ */
+ if (!capture_all)
+ num_pages_to_copy -= (GUC_LOG_CRASH_PAGES + 1);
+
+ log_buffer_state = src_ptr =
+ kmap_atomic(i915_gem_object_get_page(guc->log.obj, 0));
So why not use i915_gem_object_pin_map() from the start?
That will cut down on the churn later.
Fine, will reorder the series and squash the other patch 'drm/i915: Use
uncached(WC) mapping for accessing the GuC log buffer' with this patch.
Sorry got confused, will use the i915_gem_object_pin_map() here instead
of kmap and keep the WC mapping patch at the end of series only. Then
will just have to modify the call to i915_gem_object_pin_map() to pass
the WC flag.
Best regards
Akash
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
