[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add ppgtt->kunmap_page_dma vfunc
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Wed May 18 12:05:05 UTC 2016
On 18/05/16 12:53, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
>
>
> On 17/05/16 14:34, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> Rather than asking itself "am I a Broadwell, am I a Cherryview,
>> or am I neither of the two" on on low level page table operations,
>> like inserting and clearing PTEs; add a new vfunc kunmap_page_dma
>> and set it to appropriate flavour at ppgtt init time.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 51
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> index 7eab619a3eb2..dc7e128d7483 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c
>> @@ -361,29 +361,30 @@ static void *kmap_page_dma(struct i915_page_dma *p)
>> return kmap_atomic(p->page);
>> }
>> +static void kunmap_page_dma(void *vaddr)
>> +{
>> + kunmap_atomic(vaddr);
>> +}
>> +
>> /* We use the flushing unmap only with ppgtt structures:
>> * page directories, page tables and scratch pages.
>> */
>> -static void kunmap_page_dma(struct drm_device *dev, void *vaddr)
>> +static void kunmap_page_dma_flush(void *vaddr)
>> {
>> - /* There are only few exceptions for gen >=6. chv and bxt.
>> - * And we are not sure about the latter so play safe for now.
>> - */
>> - if (IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev) || IS_BROXTON(dev))
>> - drm_clflush_virt_range(vaddr, PAGE_SIZE);
>> + drm_clflush_virt_range(vaddr, PAGE_SIZE);
>> kunmap_atomic(vaddr);
>> }
>> #define kmap_px(px) kmap_page_dma(px_base(px))
>> -#define kunmap_px(ppgtt, vaddr) kunmap_page_dma((ppgtt)->base.dev,
>> (vaddr))
>> +#define kunmap_px(ppgtt, vaddr) (ppgtt)->kunmap_page_dma((vaddr))
>> #define setup_px(dev, px) setup_page_dma((dev), px_base(px))
>> #define cleanup_px(dev, px) cleanup_page_dma((dev), px_base(px))
>> -#define fill_px(dev, px, v) fill_page_dma((dev), px_base(px), (v))
>> -#define fill32_px(dev, px, v) fill_page_dma_32((dev), px_base(px), (v))
>> +#define fill_px(ppgtt, px, v) fill_page_dma((ppgtt), px_base(px), (v))
>> +#define fill32_px(ppgtt, px, v) fill_page_dma_32((ppgtt),
>> px_base(px), (v))
>
> This feels a bit asymmetric, because some of the functions expect the
> ppgtt pointer while others expect the dev pointer. Nothing clean comes
> to mind to solve this immediately without adding extra pointer
> indirections, but I guess we could come back to standardize it in the
> future if we start passing the ppgtt pointer around more (e.g. like in
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/83777/). Not a blocker for this
> patch anyway.
Yes I pretty much agree.
>> -static void fill_page_dma(struct drm_device *dev, struct
>> i915_page_dma *p,
>> +static void fill_page_dma(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt, struct
>> i915_page_dma *p,
>> const uint64_t val)
>> {
>> int i;
>> @@ -392,17 +393,17 @@ static void fill_page_dma(struct drm_device
>> *dev, struct i915_page_dma *p,
>> for (i = 0; i < 512; i++)
>> vaddr[i] = val;
>> - kunmap_page_dma(dev, vaddr);
>> + ppgtt->kunmap_page_dma(vaddr);
>> }
>> -static void fill_page_dma_32(struct drm_device *dev, struct
>> i915_page_dma *p,
>> - const uint32_t val32)
>> +static void fill_page_dma_32(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt,
>> + struct i915_page_dma *p, const uint32_t val32)
>> {
>> uint64_t v = val32;
>> v = v << 32 | val32;
>> - fill_page_dma(dev, p, v);
>> + fill_page_dma(ppgtt, p, v);
>> }
>> static struct i915_page_scratch *alloc_scratch_page(struct
>> drm_device *dev)
>> @@ -480,7 +481,7 @@ static void gen8_initialize_pt(struct
>> i915_address_space *vm,
>> scratch_pte = gen8_pte_encode(px_dma(vm->scratch_page),
>> I915_CACHE_LLC, true);
>> - fill_px(vm->dev, pt, scratch_pte);
>> + fill_px(i915_vm_to_ppgtt(vm), pt, scratch_pte);
>> }
>> static void gen6_initialize_pt(struct i915_address_space *vm,
>> @@ -493,7 +494,7 @@ static void gen6_initialize_pt(struct
>> i915_address_space *vm,
>> scratch_pte = vm->pte_encode(px_dma(vm->scratch_page),
>> I915_CACHE_LLC, true, 0);
>> - fill32_px(vm->dev, pt, scratch_pte);
>> + fill32_px(i915_vm_to_ppgtt(vm), pt, scratch_pte);
>> }
>> static struct i915_page_directory *alloc_pd(struct drm_device *dev)
>> @@ -540,7 +541,7 @@ static void gen8_initialize_pd(struct
>> i915_address_space *vm,
>> scratch_pde = gen8_pde_encode(px_dma(vm->scratch_pt),
>> I915_CACHE_LLC);
>> - fill_px(vm->dev, pd, scratch_pde);
>> + fill_px(i915_vm_to_ppgtt(vm), pd, scratch_pde);
>> }
>> static int __pdp_init(struct drm_device *dev,
>> @@ -621,7 +622,7 @@ static void gen8_initialize_pdp(struct
>> i915_address_space *vm,
>> scratch_pdpe = gen8_pdpe_encode(px_dma(vm->scratch_pd),
>> I915_CACHE_LLC);
>> - fill_px(vm->dev, pdp, scratch_pdpe);
>> + fill_px(i915_vm_to_ppgtt(vm), pdp, scratch_pdpe);
>> }
>> static void gen8_initialize_pml4(struct i915_address_space *vm,
>> @@ -632,7 +633,7 @@ static void gen8_initialize_pml4(struct
>> i915_address_space *vm,
>> scratch_pml4e = gen8_pml4e_encode(px_dma(vm->scratch_pdp),
>> I915_CACHE_LLC);
>> - fill_px(vm->dev, pml4, scratch_pml4e);
>> + fill_px(i915_vm_to_ppgtt(vm), pml4, scratch_pml4e);
>> }
>> static void
>> @@ -1512,8 +1513,17 @@ static int
>> gen8_preallocate_top_level_pdps(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt)
>> */
>> static int gen8_ppgtt_init(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt)
>> {
>> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(ppgtt->base.dev);
>> int ret;
>> + /* There are only few exceptions for gen >=6. chv and bxt.
>> + * And we are not sure about the latter so play safe for now.
>> + */
>> + if (IS_BROADWELL(dev_priv) || IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev_priv))
>
> This should be IS_BROXTON instead of IS_BROADWELL.
Well spotted, guess I was distracted. :)
>
>> + ppgtt->kunmap_page_dma = kunmap_page_dma_flush;
>> + else
>> + ppgtt->kunmap_page_dma = kunmap_page_dma;
>> +
>
> This virtual function assignment comes before the gen8_init_scratch call
> while all the others are after that. To keep all of them together we
> could move the call to gen8_init_scratch further down.
Yes I agree once more, I'll send a new version which will look a bit
better in this respect.
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list