On 23 August 2017 at 23:34, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 12:31:28 +0300 Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> This patch has been floating around for a while now Acked and without >> further comments. It is blocking us from merging huge page support to >> drm/i915. >> >> Would you mind merging it, or prodding the right people to get it in? >> >> Regards, Joonas >> >> On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 19:34 +0100, Matthew Auld wrote: >> > We are planning to use our own tmpfs mnt in i915 in place of the >> > shm_mnt, such that we can control the mount options, in particular >> > huge=, which we require to support huge-gtt-pages. So rather than roll >> > our own version of __shmem_file_setup, it would be preferred if we could >> > just give shmem our mnt, and let it do the rest. > > hm, it's a bit odd. I'm having trouble locating the code which handles > huge=within_size (and any other options?). See here https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/172771/, currently we only care about huge=within_size. > What other approaches were considered? We also tried https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/156528/, where it was suggested that we mount our own tmpfs instance. Following from that we now have our own tmps mnt mounted with huge=within_size. With this patch we avoid having to roll our own __shmem_file_setup like in https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/163024/. > Was it not feasible to add i915-specific mount options to > mm/shmem.c (for example?). Hmm, I think within_size should suffice for our needs. > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
