[PATCH 02/10] drm/ttm: flip over the range manager to self allocated nodes
Christian König
ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com
Wed Jun 2 13:07:45 UTC 2021
Am 02.06.21 um 14:33 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>
> On 6/2/21 2:11 PM, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 02.06.21 um 13:44 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel):
>>>
>>> On 6/2/21 12:09 PM, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Start with the range manager to make the resource object the base
>>>> class for the allocated nodes.
>>>>
>>>> While at it cleanup a lot of the code around that.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c | 1 +
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c | 2 +
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c | 2 +
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c | 1 +
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c | 1 +
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c | 56
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++-------
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_resource.c | 26 ++++++++----
>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h | 26 ------------
>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h | 43 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_resource.h | 3 ++
>>>> 10 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
>>>> create mode 100644 include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>> index 69db89261650..df1f185faae9 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c
>>>> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>> #include <drm/amdgpu_drm.h>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>> index 83e7258c7f90..17a4c5d47b6a 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c
>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>>>> #include <drm/drm_prime.h>
>>>> #include <drm/drm_simple_kms_helper.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>> +
>>>> static const struct drm_gem_object_funcs drm_gem_vram_object_funcs;
>>>> /**
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>> index 65430912ff72..b08b8efeefba 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c
>>>> @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@
>>>> #include <linux/limits.h>
>>>> #include <linux/swiotlb.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>> +
>>>> #include "nouveau_drv.h"
>>>> #include "nouveau_gem.h"
>>>> #include "nouveau_mem.h"
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>> index 8aa87b8edb9c..19fd39d9a00c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c
>>>> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>> #include "qxl_drv.h"
>>>> #include "qxl_object.h"
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>> index cdffa9b65108..ad2a5a791bba 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c
>>>> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>> #include "radeon_reg.h"
>>>> #include "radeon.h"
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>> index b9d5da6e6a81..ce5d07ca384c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>> @@ -29,12 +29,13 @@
>>>> * Authors: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom-at-vmware-dot-com>
>>>> */
>>>> -#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_device.h>
>>>> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h>
>>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h>
>>>> #include <drm/drm_mm.h>
>>>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>> #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>>>> -#include <linux/module.h>
>>>> /*
>>>> * Currently we use a spinlock for the lock, but a mutex *may* be
>>>> @@ -60,8 +61,8 @@ static int ttm_range_man_alloc(struct
>>>> ttm_resource_manager *man,
>>>> struct ttm_resource *mem)
>>>> {
>>>> struct ttm_range_manager *rman = to_range_manager(man);
>>>> + struct ttm_range_mgr_node *node;
>>>> struct drm_mm *mm = &rman->mm;
>>>> - struct drm_mm_node *node;
>>>> enum drm_mm_insert_mode mode;
>>>> unsigned long lpfn;
>>>> int ret;
>>>> @@ -70,7 +71,7 @@ static int ttm_range_man_alloc(struct
>>>> ttm_resource_manager *man,
>>>> if (!lpfn)
>>>> lpfn = man->size;
>>>> - node = kzalloc(sizeof(*node), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> + node = kzalloc(struct_size(node, mm_nodes, 1), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>
>>> I'm still a bit confused about the situation where a driver wants
>>> to attach private data to a struct ttm_resource without having to
>>> re-implement its own range manager?
>>>
>>> Could be cached sg-tables, list of GPU bindings etc. Wouldn't work
>>> with the above unless we have a void *driver_private member on the
>>> struct ttm_resource. Is that the plan going forward here? Or that
>>> the driver actually does the re-implementation?
>>
>> I don't really understand your concern here. The basic idea is that
>> drivers use ttm_resource as a base class for their own implementation.
>>
>> See for example how nouveau does that:
>>
>> struct nouveau_mem {
>> struct ttm_resource base;
>> struct nouveau_cli *cli;
>> u8 kind;
>> u8 comp;
>> struct nvif_mem mem;
>> struct nvif_vma vma[2];
>> };
>>
>> The range manager is helping driver specific resource managers which
>> want to implement something drm_mm_nodes based. E.g. amdgpu_gtt_mgr
>> and amdgpu_vram_mgr, but it can also be used stand alone.
>>
>> The ttm_range_mgr_node can then be used as base class for this
>> functionality. I already want to move some more code from
>> amdgpu_vram_mgr.c into the range manager, but that is just minor
>> cleanup work.
>>
> Sure but if you embed a ttm_range_mgr_node in your struct
> i915_resource, and wanted to use the ttm range manager for it, it
> would allocate a struct ttm_range_mgr_node rather than a struct
> i915_resource? Or am I missing something?
Yes, that's the general idea I'm targeting for. I'm just not fully there
yet.
The ttm range manager then provides functions to implement debugging
and/or the iterator for example while the driver specific parts only
implement stuff like special placement handling.
Christian.
>
> /Thomas
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>>
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list