On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:54:59AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 05:54:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:52:23PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > > > Technology has evolved and now we have eDP panels with 3200x1800 > > > resolution. In the meantime, the BIOS guys didn't change the default > > > 32mb for stolen memory. On top of that, we can't assume our users will > > > be able to increase the default stolen memory size to more than 32mb - > > > I'm not even sure all BIOSes allow that. > > > > fbcon is just a small part of the problem, we can trivially fill stolen > > with kernel objects even before we let userspace at it. I agree that being > > able to prioritise allocation to HW functions is good, but it is not that hard > > to write an eviction + migration pass - given that we already have large > > chunks of that written. The only issue is that (at least the sketch I > > have in mind) will only evict objects so if we have fragmentation > > caused by HW functions, allocations can still fail. > > Problem with fbcon is that we can migrate it (well we could do _really_ Can or can't? The screen.base pointer is an iomap so to migrate it we just need to point the PTE elsewhere. We can't combine a vmalloc arena and stolen anyway :| -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
