[PATCH 02/10] drm/ttm: flip over the range manager to self allocated nodes
Thomas Hellström (Intel)
thomas_os at shipmail.org
Wed Jun 2 14:13:02 UTC 2021
On 6/2/21 3:07 PM, Christian König wrote:
>
>
> 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.
Hmm, I don't fully understand the reply, I described a buggy scenario
and you replied that's what we're targeting for?
I assume you mean we're going to get an init() method for the range
manager, and a destroy method for the struct ttm_resource?
Thanks,
Thomas
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list