[PATCH] TTM DMA pool v1.7
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
konrad.wilk at oracle.com
Tue Aug 30 19:41:45 PDT 2011
Since v1: [http://lwn.net/Articles/456246/]
- Ran it through the gauntlet of SubmitChecklist and fixed issues
- Made radeon/nouveau driver set coherent_dma (which is required for dmapool)
[.. and this is what I said in v1 post]:
Way back in January this patchset:
was merged in, but pieces of it had to be reverted b/c they did not
work properly under PowerPC, ARM, and when swapping out pages to disk.
After a bit of discussion on the mailing list
http://marc.info/?i=4D769726.email@example.com I started working on it, but
got waylaid by other things .. and finally I am able to post the RFC patches.
There was a lot of discussion about it and I am not sure if I captured
everybody's thoughts - if I did not - that is _not_ intentional - it has just
been quite some time..
Anyhow .. the patches explore what the "lib/dmapool.c" does - which is to have a
DMA pool that the device has associated with. I kind of married that code
along with drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc.c to create a TTM DMA pool code.
The end result is DMA pool with extra features: can do write-combine, uncached,
writeback (and tracks them and sets back to WB when freed); tracks "cached"
pages that don't really need to be returned to a pool; and hooks up to
the shrinker code so that the pools can be shrunk.
If you guys think this set of patches make sense - my future plans were
1) Get this in large crowd of testing .. and if it works for a kernel release
2) to move a bulk of this in the lib/dmapool.c (I spoke with Matthew Wilcox
about it and he is OK as long as I don't introduce performance regressions).
But before I do any of that a second set of eyes taking a look at these
patches would be most welcome.
In regards to testing, I've been running them non-stop for the last two weeks
(and found some issues which I've fixed up) - and been quite happy with how
they work. I finally got my Intel VT-d box online so will test that shortly.
Michel (thanks!) took a spin off the patches on his PowerPC and they did not
cause any regressions (wheew).
The patches are also located in a git tree:
And the full diffstat is:
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_mem.c | 8 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_sgdma.c | 3 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c | 6 +
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_gart.c | 4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c | 3 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/Makefile | 3 +
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_memory.c | 5 +
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc.c | 63 ++-
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc_dma.c | 1317 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_tt.c | 5 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c | 4 +-
drivers/xen/swiotlb-xen.c | 2 +-
include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h | 7 +-
include/drm/ttm/ttm_page_alloc.h | 100 +++-
include/linux/swiotlb.h | 7 +-
lib/swiotlb.c | 5 +-
17 files changed, 1516 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
More information about the dri-devel