Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2019-10-28 16:46:46) > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 04:39:50PM +0000, Matthew Auld wrote: > > There is nothing to say that the obj->base.size is actually a multiple > > of the block_size. > > > > Reported-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c > > index 516e61e99212..5597f1345a63 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c > > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct i915_vma *intel_emit_vma_fill_blt(struct intel_context *ce, > > GEM_BUG_ON(intel_engine_is_virtual(ce->engine)); > > intel_engine_pm_get(ce->engine); > > > > - count = div_u64(vma->size, block_size); > > + count = DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP(vma->size, block_size); > > block_size size look to be u32? And we can control it to be a pot. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
