On Fri, 04 Nov 2016, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:59:08PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: >> >> On 04/11/2016 11:08, Chris Wilson wrote: >> >Valleyview and Cherryview are definitely limited to only scanning out >> >from the first 256MiB and 512MiB of the Global GTT respectively. Lets >> >presume that this behaviour was inherited from the display block copied >> >from g4x (not Ironlake) and all earlier generations are similarly >> >affected. For simplicity, impose that these platforms must scanout from >> >the mappable region. >> > >> >Reported-by: Luis Botello <luis.botello.ortega@xxxxxxxxx> >> >Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98036 >> >Fixes: 2efb813d5388 ("drm/i915: Fallback to using unmappable memory for scanout") >> >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >Cc: Akash Goel <akash.goel@xxxxxxxxx> >> >Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >Cc: <drm-intel-fixes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v4.9-rc1+ >> >--- >> >This leaves Ironlake -> Haswell with a bit of uncertainity. It is also >> >not clear if the scanout accessible region is similarly limited on all >> >gen8+, and so whether we need to similarly curtain the upper range for >> >their scanouts. >> >--- >> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- >> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c >> >index 269e2487c104..408875fbec66 100644 >> >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c >> >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c >> >@@ -3661,8 +3661,22 @@ i915_gem_object_pin_to_display_plane(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, >> > if (view->type == I915_GGTT_VIEW_NORMAL) >> > vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin(obj, view, 0, alignment, >> > PIN_MAPPABLE | PIN_NONBLOCK); >> >- if (IS_ERR(vma)) >> >- vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin(obj, view, 0, alignment, 0); >> >+ if (IS_ERR(vma)) { >> >+ struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(obj->base.dev); >> >> dev_priv ? >> >> What do we do with i915_params being a global i915? > > Sssh, I'm gradually waging war against dev_priv. > Eventually Jani won't be able to complain about i915 being the minority. > > The global modparams is an easy rename. I just liked that i915.foo was the same on both the kernel command line and in code. I kinda still do, but like Chris I'm not too fond of dev_priv either, and i915 seems like a good replacement. Seeing how module parameters multiply like rabbits, with all sorts of sanitization, how the parameters are changed in kernel, and /sys/module/i915/parameters/ not reflecting what the user did, maybe you could come up with something nice for that while at it... BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
