On 1/26/22 16:21, Matthew Auld wrote:
If we need to make room for some some mappable object, then we should
only victimize objects that have one or pages that occupy the visible
portion of LMEM. Let's also create a new priority hint for objects that
are placed in mappable memory, where we know that CPU access was
requested, that way we hopefully victimize these last.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
index e4cd6ccf5ab1..8376e4c3d290 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
@@ -5,8 +5,10 @@
#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
#include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
+#include <drm/drm_buddy.h>
#include "i915_drv.h"
+#include "i915_ttm_buddy_manager.h"
#include "intel_memory_region.h"
#include "intel_region_ttm.h"
@@ -20,6 +22,7 @@
#define I915_TTM_PRIO_PURGE 0
#define I915_TTM_PRIO_NO_PAGES 1
#define I915_TTM_PRIO_HAS_PAGES 2
+#define I915_TTM_PRIO_NEEDS_CPU_ACCESS 3
/*
* Size of struct ttm_place vector in on-stack struct ttm_placement allocs
@@ -337,6 +340,7 @@ static bool i915_ttm_eviction_valuable(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
const struct ttm_place *place)
{
struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = i915_ttm_to_gem(bo);
+ struct ttm_resource *res = bo->resource;
if (!obj)
return false;
@@ -350,7 +354,48 @@ static bool i915_ttm_eviction_valuable(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
return false;
/* Will do for now. Our pinned objects are still on TTM's LRU lists */
- return i915_gem_object_evictable(obj);
+ if (!i915_gem_object_evictable(obj))
+ return false;
+
+ switch (res->mem_type) {
+ case TTM_PL_PRIV: {
We should use the I915_ placements for better readability.
Otherwise Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
