On 6/23/21 1:26 PM, Matthew Auld wrote:
The min_page_size is only needed for pages inserted into the GTT, and
for our paging structures we only need at most 4K bytes, so simply
ignore the min_page_size restrictions here, otherwise we might see some
severe overallocation on some devices.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
index 084ea65d59c0..61e8a8c25374 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gtt.c
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_object *alloc_pt_lmem(struct i915_address_space *vm, int sz)
{
struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
- obj = i915_gem_object_create_lmem(vm->i915, sz, 0);
+ obj = __i915_gem_object_create_lmem_with_ps(vm->i915, sz, sz, 0);
/*
* Ensure all paging structures for this vm share the same dma-resv
* object underneath, with the idea that one object_lock() will lock
I think for this one the new gt migration code might break, because
there we insert even PT pages into the GTT, so it might need a special
interface? Ram is looking at supporter larger GPU PTE sizes with that code..
/Thomas
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
