TTM and AGP conflicts
thellstrom at vmware.com
Mon Jan 9 01:07:02 PST 2012
On 01/06/2012 04:51 PM, James Simmons wrote:
>>>> You can achieve what you want by either adding a new domain so you would have
>>>> system, vram, agp, pcidma and object can be bound to one and only one. Or you
>>>> can hack your own agp ttm backend that could bind bo to agp or pci or
>>>> both at the same time depending on what you want to achieve.
>>> The question is how does one know which domain you want in tt_create.
>>> Currenty drivers are using there dev_priv but if you have have more than
>>> one option available how does one choose? Would you be okay with passing
>>> in a domain flag?
>> Well i agree that something would be usefull there so the driver know
>> which bind/unbind function it should use. Thomas i would prefer
>> passing the bo to the tt_create callback but a flag is the minimum we
> We can discuss this after the merge widow. Jerome your patch does fix a
> regression whereas my proposal is a enhancement.
..Back from parental leave.
I'm not 100% sure I understand the problem correctly, but I assume the
problem is that
you receive a "bind" request for pages allocated out of the wrong DMA
pool? Is that correct?
In that case we need to make both the following happen:
1) The backend should be required to supply a fallback that can bind
anyway by allocating the correct page type and copy.
2) I'm OK with providing a hint to tt_create. IIRC we're passing bo::mem
to tt_bind. Would it be ok to pass the same to tt_create?
More information about the dri-devel