On 7/1/2015 4:43 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 04:27:32PM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote:+ flags |= PIN_ZONE_4G; + if (entry->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_SUPPORTS_48B_ADDRESS) + flags &= ~PIN_ZONE_4G; + if (!drm_mm_node_allocated(&vma->node)) { if (entry->flags & __EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_MAP) flags |= PIN_GLOBAL | PIN_MAPPABLE; if (entry->flags & __EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_BIAS) flags |= BATCH_OFFSET_BIAS | PIN_OFFSET_BIAS; + if ((flags & PIN_MAPPABLE) == 0) + flags |= PIN_HIGH;I'm still debating the right semantics to use, but I'm happy with this until I can find something better. (The biggest issue is that drm_mm is not indexed for fast top-down searching. The current search code I put into drm_mm is unfortunately broken, the idea I have in mind to fix it is to add a hole_list into drm_mm/drm_mm_node, so that we can just walk holes in up/down, recent/old order. And with that allocating top-down will not be any more expensive than the current reuse recent hole - though perhaps given a fragment drm_mm the hole stack probably requires fewer steps to find a large hole.) Other than don't touch PIN_OFFSET_MASK and move the w/a note next to where we tweak the PIN_ZONE_4G, it lgtm, so with those changes,
Also the comment should be "limit address to the first 4GBs for _unflagged_ objects". I didn't update it after changing the logic.
I'll resend with these changes. Thanks,
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -Chris
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
