[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 04/19] drm/i915/stolen: treat stolen local as normal local memory

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 12/04/2021 10:05, Matthew Auld wrote:
> Underneath it's the same stuff, so things like the PTE_LM bits for the
> GTT should just keep working as-is.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_lmem.c | 5 ++++-
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_lmem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_lmem.c
> index ce1c83c13d05..017db8f71130 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_lmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_lmem.c
> @@ -19,7 +19,10 @@ const struct drm_i915_gem_object_ops i915_gem_lmem_obj_ops = {
>   
>   bool i915_gem_object_is_lmem(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
>   {
> -	return obj->ops == &i915_gem_lmem_obj_ops;
> +	struct intel_memory_region *mr = obj->mm.region;
> +
> +	return mr && (mr->type == INTEL_MEMORY_LOCAL ||
> +		      mr->type == INTEL_MEMORY_STOLEN_LOCAL);
>   }
>   
>   struct drm_i915_gem_object *
> 

Passable I guess. Although there is also i915_gem_object_is_stolen so it 
is not immediately clear what are the semantics of 
i915_gem_object_is_lmem vs that one. Almost like we need more 
"hierarchy" in region types, or flags of some sort, but I haven't looked 
at the callers to have a good idea what would work best.

Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>

Regards,

Tvrtko