[Intel-gfx] [RFC v4 03/14] drm/i915/vm_bind: Expose i915_gem_object_max_page_size()
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Fri Sep 23 07:45:42 UTC 2022
On 22/09/2022 17:18, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On 22/09/2022 09:09, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 21/09/2022 19:00, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:13:12AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 21/09/2022 08:09, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
>>>>> Expose i915_gem_object_max_page_size() function non-static
>>>>> which will be used by the vm_bind feature.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Niranjana Vishwanathapura
>>>>> <niranjana.vishwanathapura at intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti at linux.intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_create.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h | 2 ++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_create.c
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_create.c
>>>>> index 33673fe7ee0a..3b3ab4abb0a3 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_create.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_create.c
>>>>> @@ -11,14 +11,24 @@
>>>>> #include "pxp/intel_pxp.h"
>>>>> #include "i915_drv.h"
>>>>> +#include "i915_gem_context.h"
>>>>
>>>> I can't spot that you are adding any code which would need this?
>>>> I915_GTT_PAGE_SIZE_4K? It is in intel_gtt.h.
>>>
>>> This include should have been added in a later patch for calling
>>> i915_gem_vm_lookup(). But got added here while patch refactoring.
>>> Will fix.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> #include "i915_gem_create.h"
>>>>> #include "i915_trace.h"
>>>>> #include "i915_user_extensions.h"
>>>>> -static u32 object_max_page_size(struct intel_memory_region
>>>>> **placements,
>>>>> - unsigned int n_placements)
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * i915_gem_object_max_page_size() - max of min_page_size of the
>>>>> regions
>>>>> + * @placements: list of regions
>>>>> + * @n_placements: number of the placements
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * Calculates the max of the min_page_size of a list of placements
>>>>> passed in.
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * Return: max of the min_page_size
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +u32 i915_gem_object_max_page_size(struct intel_memory_region
>>>>> **placements,
>>>>> + unsigned int n_placements)
>>>>> {
>>>>> - u32 max_page_size = 0;
>>>>> + u32 max_page_size = I915_GTT_PAGE_SIZE_4K;
>>>>> int i;
>>>>> for (i = 0; i < n_placements; i++) {
>>>>> @@ -28,7 +38,6 @@ static u32 object_max_page_size(struct
>>>>> intel_memory_region **placements,
>>>>> max_page_size = max_t(u32, max_page_size, mr->min_page_size);
>>>>> }
>>>>> - GEM_BUG_ON(!max_page_size);
>>>>> return max_page_size;
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -99,7 +108,8 @@ __i915_gem_object_create_user_ext(struct
>>>>> drm_i915_private *i915, u64 size,
>>>>> i915_gem_flush_free_objects(i915);
>>>>> - size = round_up(size, object_max_page_size(placements,
>>>>> n_placements));
>>>>> + size = round_up(size, i915_gem_object_max_page_size(placements,
>>>>> + n_placements));
>>>>> if (size == 0)
>>>>> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>>>>
>>>> Because of the changes above this path is now unreachable. I suppose
>>>> it was meant to tell the user "you have supplied no placements"? But
>>>> then GEM_BUG_ON (which you remove) used to be wrong.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yah, looks like an existing problem. May be this "size == 0" check
>>> should have been made before we do the round_up()? ie., check input
>>> 'size'
>>> paramter is not 0?
>>> I think for now, I will remove this check as it was unreachable anyhow.
>>
>> Hm that's true as well. i915_gem_create_ext_ioctl ensures at least one
>> placement and internal callers do as well.
>>
>> To be safe, instead of removing maybe move to before "size = " and
>> change to "if (GEM_WARN_ON(n_placements == 0))"? Not sure.. Matt any
>> thoughts here given the changes in this patch?
>
> The check is also to reject a zero sized object with args->size = 0, i.e
> round_up(0, PAGE_SIZE) == 0. So for sure that is still needed here.
Oh yeah sneaky round up.. Thanks, my bad.
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list