On 13/06/2019 16:42, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-06-13 16:19:02)
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
This will become useful in the following patch.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h | 2 ++
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
index 99e30f8cfbe0..c909aae6e4b3 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
@@ -18,11 +18,13 @@
#include "intel_wakeref.h"
struct drm_i915_private;
+struct i915_ggtt;
struct intel_uncore;
struct intel_gt {
struct drm_i915_private *i915;
struct intel_uncore *uncore;
+ struct i915_ggtt *ggtt;
But not moving i915->ggtt itself?
Moving as removing? That looks like a huge job. I can try and asses
exactly how big but I was hoping that I don't have to do everything in
one go.
struct i915_gt_timelines {
struct mutex mutex; /* protects list, tainted by GPU */
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
index ea276ed9021a..9aa25770081c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
@@ -3618,6 +3618,7 @@ static int ggtt_init_hw(struct i915_ggtt *ggtt)
i915_address_space_init(vm, VM_CLASS_GGTT);
vm->is_ggtt = true;
+ vm->gt->ggtt = ggtt;
This looks very much to be a layer violation.
A bit yes. I think I can work around it with some refactoring.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
