On 22/12/15 17:40, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:58:33AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:Maybe: if (!obj->base.filp || cpu_write_needs_clflush(obj)) ret = i915_gem_gtt_pwrite_fast(...); if (ret == -EFAULT && !obj->base.filp) { ret = i915_gem_gtt_pwrite_slow(...) /* New function, doing the slow_user_access loop for !filp objects, extracted from gtt_pwrite_fast above. */The point is that "gtt_pwrite_slow" is going to be preferrable in the cases where it is possible. It just wasn't the full fallback patch for all objects previously, so we didn't bother to write a partial fallback handler.
Maybe I don't get this - is fast_user_write expected always to fail for non shmem backed objects? And so revert to the slow_user_path always and immediately? Because fast_user_write is still the primary choice for everything.
Perhaps this needs a matrix in the comment/commit describing which path for which objects and when..
Regards, Tvrtko _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
