On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 2:32 AM Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 09:37:00 +0100
> Adrián Larumbe <adrian.larumbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > The current implementation will try to pick the highest available size
> > display unit as soon as the BO size exceeds that of the previous
> > multiplier. That can lead to loss of precision in BO's whose size is
> > not a multiple of a MiB.
> >
> > Fix it by changing the unit selection criteria.
> >
> > For much bigger BO's, their size will naturally be aligned on something
> > bigger than a 4 KiB page, so in practice it is very unlikely their display
> > unit would default to KiB.
>
> Let's wait for Rob's opinion on this.
This would mean that if you have SZ_1G + SZ_1K worth of buffers, you'd
report the result in KiB.. which seems like overkill to me, esp given
that the result is just a snapshot in time of a figure that
realistically is dynamic.
Maybe if you have SZ_1G+SZ_1K worth of buffers you should report the
result with more precision than GiB, but more than MiB seems a bit
overkill.
BR,
-R
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adrián Larumbe <adrian.larumbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c
> > index 762965e3d503..bf7d2fe46bfa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c
> > @@ -879,7 +879,7 @@ static void print_size(struct drm_printer *p, const char *stat,
> > unsigned u;
> >
> > for (u = 0; u < ARRAY_SIZE(units) - 1; u++) {
> > - if (sz < SZ_1K)
> > + if (sz & (SZ_1K - 1))
> > break;
> > sz = div_u64(sz, SZ_1K);
> > }
>
