On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 14:39:17 +0100
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 14/07/2022 13:06, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > From: Chris Wilson <chris.p.wilson@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Don't flush TLBs when the buffer is only used in the GGTT under full
> > control of the kernel, as there's no risk of concurrent access
> > and stale access from prefetch.
> >
> > We only need to invalidate the TLB if they are accessible by the user.
> > That helps to reduce the performance regression introduced by TLB
> > invalidate logic.
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Fixes: 7938d61591d3 ("drm/i915: Flush TLBs before releasing backing store")
>
> Do we really need or want stable and fixes on this one?
>
> What do we think the performance improvement is, given there's very
> little in GGTT, which is not mapped via PPGTT as well?
>
> I think it is safe, but part of me would ideally not even want to think
> about whether it is safe, if the performance improvement is
> non-existent. Which I can't imagine how there would be?
Makes sense. Patch 6 actually ends removing the code doing
that, so I'll just fold this patch with patch 6, in order to
avoid adding something that will later be removed.
Regards,
Mauro
