Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] drm/i915/: Re-work clflush_write32

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 28/01/2022 22:10, Michael Cheng wrote:
Use drm_clflush_virt_range instead of clflushopt and remove the memory
barrier, since drm_clflush_virt_range takes care of that.

Signed-off-by: Michael Cheng <michael.cheng@xxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 8 +++-----
  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index 498b458fd784..0854276ff7ba 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -1332,10 +1332,8 @@ static void *reloc_vaddr(struct i915_vma *vma,
  static void clflush_write32(u32 *addr, u32 value, unsigned int flushes)
  {
  	if (unlikely(flushes & (CLFLUSH_BEFORE | CLFLUSH_AFTER))) {
-		if (flushes & CLFLUSH_BEFORE) {
-			clflushopt(addr);
-			mb();
-		}
+		if (flushes & CLFLUSH_BEFORE)
+			drm_clflush_virt_range(addr, sizeof(addr));
*addr = value; @@ -1347,7 +1345,7 @@ static void clflush_write32(u32 *addr, u32 value, unsigned int flushes)
  		 * to ensure ordering of clflush wrt to the system.
  		 */
  		if (flushes & CLFLUSH_AFTER)
-			clflushopt(addr);
+			drm_clflush_virt_range(addr, sizeof(addr));
  	} else
  		*addr = value;
  }

Slightly annoying thing here (maybe in some other patches from the series as well) is that the change adds a function call to x86 only code path, because relocations are not supported on discrete as per:

static in
eb_validate_vma(...)
        /* Relocations are disallowed for all platforms after TGL-LP.  This
         * also covers all platforms with local memory.
         */

        if (entry->relocation_count &&
            GRAPHICS_VER(eb->i915) >= 12 && !IS_TIGERLAKE(eb->i915))
                return -EINVAL;

How acceptable would be, for the whole series, to introduce a static inline i915 cluflush wrapper and so be able to avoid functions calls on x86? Is this something that has been discussed and discounted already?

Regards,

Tvrtko

P.S. Hmm I am now reminded of my really old per platform build patches. With them you would be able to compile out large portions of the driver when building for ARM. Probably like a 3rd if my memory serves me right.



[Index of Archives]     [AMD Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux