[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Reserve fence slots for command submission

[Christian König]

Am 04.07.2018 um 09:57 schrieb Zhang, Jerry (Junwei):
> On 07/04/2018 03:21 PM, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> On 2018-07-04 08:55 AM, Zhang, Jerry (Junwei) wrote:
>>> On 07/04/2018 02:34 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Am 04.07.2018 um 05:02 schrieb Junwei Zhang:
>>>>> From: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer at amd.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Without this, there could not be enough slots, which could trigger 
>>>>> the
>>>>> BUG_ON in reservation_object_add_shared_fence.
>>>>>
>>>>> v2:
>>>>> * Jump to the error label instead of returning directly (Jerry Zhang)
>>>>> v3:
>>>>> * Reserve slots for command submission after VM updates (Christian
>>>>> König)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
>>>>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/106418
>>>>> Reported-by: mikhail.v.gavrilov at gmail.com
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer at amd.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Junwei Zhang <Jerry.Zhang at amd.com>
>>>>
>>>> I would put that at the end of amdgpu_bo_vm_update_pte(), but that is
>>>> only a minor nit pick.
>>>
>>> At first, I really put it at the end of amdgpu_bo_vm_update_pte().
>>> On the 2nd thought, that func may be called by others(although it's not
>>> for now), so I move it out of there to the caller.

Well that is exactly the reason I wanted to have it in 
amdgpu_bo_vm_update_pte() :)

But you are right, there are good arguments for both approach and as 
long as we don't have a second user it doesn't matter.

Christian.

>>
>> Makes sense to me, FWIW. Thanks Junwei and Christian!
>
> Please confirm if that works in your side.
> If yes, I would push that to drm-next then.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jerry
>
>>
>>
>> P.S. Christian, any feedback on
>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/232204/ ?
>>