On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 05:06:16PM +0100, Christian König wrote:
Am 01.03.24 um 17:04 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:
On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 02:01:05PM +0100, Christian König wrote:
Gentle ping. Can I get an rb for that?
Thanks,
Christian.
Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
For some reason CI failed, but can't be related with this change.
I re-triggered it to see if we can get a green run before merging.
Do you want to pick it into a i915 branch or should I push it to
drm-misc-next(-fixes) then?
You can push it through drm-misc since that's where a78a8da51b36 came
from. If we feel like waiting CI to come back, let's wait a few hours.
Such an obvious fix for a build breakage that I'm not opposed to simply
letting it through though.
Lucas De Marchi
Christian.
thanks
Lucas De Marchi
Am 26.02.24 um 15:27 schrieb Christian König:
Switching from a separate list to flags introduced a bug here.
We were accidentially ORing the flag before initailizing the placement
and not after. So this code didn't do nothing except producing a
warning.
Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: a78a8da51b36 ("drm/ttm: replace busy placement with flags v6")
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
index a6b0aaf30cbe..7264fb08eee8 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c
@@ -162,10 +162,10 @@ i915_ttm_placement_from_obj(const struct
drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
unsigned int flags = obj->flags;
unsigned int i;
- places[0].flags |= TTM_PL_FLAG_DESIRED;
i915_ttm_place_from_region(num_allowed ? obj->mm.placements[0] :
obj->mm.region, &places[0], obj->bo_offset,
obj->base.size, flags);
+ places[0].flags |= TTM_PL_FLAG_DESIRED;
/* Cache this on object? */
for (i = 0; i < num_allowed; ++i) {
