On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 19:38, Juha-Pekka Heikkila <juhapekka.heikkila@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 21.6.2022 13.53, Matthew Auld wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Jun 2022 at 10:38, Juha-Pekka Heikkila > > <juhapekka.heikkila@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 10.6.2022 20.43, Matthew Auld wrote: > >>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 at 15:53, Matthew Auld > >>> <matthew.william.auld@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 at 13:12, Juha-Pekka Heikkila > >>>> <juhapekka.heikkila@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> From: CQ Tang <cq.tang@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> > >>>>> Display might allocate a smem object and call > >>>>> i915_vma_pin_iomap(), the existing code will fail. > >>>>> > >>>>> This fix was suggested by Chris P Wilson, that we pin > >>>>> the smem with i915_gem_object_pin_map_unlocked(). > >>>>> > >>>>> v2 (jheikkil): Change i915_gem_object_pin_map_unlocked to > >>>>> i915_gem_object_pin_map > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: CQ Tang <cq.tang@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Juha-Pekka Heikkila <juhapekka.heikkila@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris.p.wilson@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Cc: Jari Tahvanainen <jari.tahvanainen@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Although maybe consider putting this as patch 1, and then reword the > >>> commit title/message to be more like "drm/i915: extend > >>> i915_vma_iomap()" or so, which then becomes a prep patch for > >>> supporting the dpt fallback to smem. Otherwise it looks like this > >>> patch is basically just fixing the first patch to not trigger the > >>> WARN_ON(), which seems iffy IMO. Each patch by itself should ideally > >>> be functional. > >> > >> Probably easiest is to put patch 1 in as last, it's the final customer > >> for these two other patches. This way if someone will end up doing > >> bisecting there would be nothing interesting to see with these. > >> > >> I did finally get ci to look all green after last weeks outages. I'd > >> guess these patches are ready to be pushed but I don't have commit > >> rights to drm-tip. Are you able to help with these or I'll go bother > >> Imre or Jani to get them into tip? > > > > Ok, if no objections I will go ahead and push this to > > drm-intel-gt-next, with the tweaked patch ordering. > > No objections. I had this set yet on test run on Imre's wish on try-bot > with forcing adlp (on bat) to use smem and results were all clean. And pushed. Thanks for the patches. > > /Juha-Pekka
