[PATCH v3 2/2] drm/lima: driver for ARM Mali4xx GPUs

[Qiang Yu]

> > +static struct lima_fence *lima_fence_create(struct lima_sched_pipe *pipe)
> > +{
> > +       struct lima_fence *fence;
> > +
> > +       fence = kmem_cache_zalloc(lima_fence_slab, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Out of curiosity, what is the benefit of using a separate slab here?
> If this is beneficial, then other drivers should do this too and it
> should be common. Otherwise, it adds some complexity.

fence is pretty frequently alloc free struct, so make it a slab. And it's used
in get/put pattern, so may live longer than embedded struct. This is referenced
from amdgpu driver.

>
> And maybe the slab should be initialzed in probe rather than module_init.
>
Either way is OK. But live in module init is easier not to init twice
for two devices.

> > +int lima_vm_bo_add(struct lima_vm *vm, struct lima_bo *bo, bool create)
> > +{
> > +       struct lima_bo_va *bo_va;
> > +       int err;
> > +
> > +       mutex_lock(&bo->lock);
> > +
> > +       bo_va = lima_vm_bo_find(vm, bo);
> > +       if (bo_va) {
> > +               bo_va->ref_count++;
> > +               mutex_unlock(&bo->lock);
> > +               return 0;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       /* should not create new bo_va if not asked by caller */
> > +       if (!create) {
> > +               mutex_unlock(&bo->lock);
> > +               return -ENOENT;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       bo_va = kzalloc(sizeof(*bo_va), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +       if (!bo_va) {
> > +               err = -ENOMEM;
> > +               goto err_out0;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       bo_va->vm = vm;
> > +       bo_va->ref_count = 1;
> > +
> > +       mutex_lock(&vm->lock);
> > +
> > +       err = drm_mm_insert_node(&vm->mm, &bo_va->node, bo->gem.size);
> > +       if (err)
> > +               goto err_out1;
> > +
> > +       err = lima_vm_map_page_table(vm, bo->pages_dma_addr, bo_va->node.start,
> > +                                    bo_va->node.start + bo_va->node.size - 1);
> > +       if (err)
> > +               goto err_out2;
> > +
> > +       mutex_unlock(&vm->lock);
> > +
> > +       list_add_tail(&bo_va->list, &bo->va);
>
> So you can have 1 BO at multiple VAs? Is that really needed?
>
Actually 1 BO can't have multi VA in single VM, but one VA in each VM.
When a BO is exported/imported between two process, i.e. xserver and client,
two processes have different VM, so can't make sure it can be mapped at the same
place.

Regards,
Qiang