Quoting Zhenyu Wang (2018-07-13 03:03:10) > On 2018.07.12 20:36:03 +0000, Bloomfield, Jon wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 11:53 AM > > > To: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Zhenyu Wang > > > <zhenyuw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Bloomfield, Jon <jon.bloomfield@xxxxxxxxx>; > > > Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Matthew Auld > > > <matthew.william.auld@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: [PATCH 3/6] drm/i915/gtt: Disable read-only support under GVT > > > > > > GVT is not propagating the PTE bits, and is always setting the > > > read-write bit, thus breaking read-only support. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.william.auld@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 8 ++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > index 6c0b438afe46..8e70a45b8a90 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > > @@ -1662,8 +1662,12 @@ static struct i915_hw_ppgtt > > > *gen8_ppgtt_create(struct drm_i915_private *i915) > > > 1ULL << 48 : > > > 1ULL << 32; > > > > > > - /* From bdw, there is support for read-only pages in the PPGTT */ > > > - ppgtt->vm.has_read_only = true; > > > + /* > > > + * From bdw, there is support for read-only pages in the PPGTT. > > > + * > > > + * XXX GVT is not setting honouring the PTE bits. > > > + */ > > > + ppgtt->vm.has_read_only = !intel_vgpu_active(i915); > > > > > > i915_address_space_init(&ppgtt->vm, i915); > > > > > > -- > > > 2.18.0 > > > > Is there a blocker that prevents gvt respecting this bit? I can't think of an obvious > > reason why it would be a bad thing to support. > > I don't think any blocker for gvt support, we can respect that bit when shadowing. > But we need capability check on host gvt when that support is ready. Another cap bit required, so ack on both sides? -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
