[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 0/5] drm/i915: Allow user to set cache at BO creation

[Thomas Hellström (Intel)]

On 4/28/23 19:43, Yang, Fei wrote:
> >> On 4/28/23 17:19, Yang, Fei wrote:
> >>> On 4/28/23 07:47, fei.yang at intel.com wrote:
> >>>> From: Fei Yang <fei.yang at intel.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> The first three patches in this series are taken from
> >>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/116868/
> >>>> These patches are included here because the last patch
> >>>> has dependency on the pat_index refactor.
> >>>>
> >>>> This series is focusing on uAPI changes,
> >>>> 1. end support for set caching ioctl [PATCH 4/5]
> >>>> 2. add set_pat extension for gem_create [PATCH 5/5]
> >>>>
> >>>> v2: drop one patch that was merged separately
> >>>>      341ad0e8e254 drm/i915/mtl: Add PTE encode function
> >>>> v3: rebase on https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/117082/
> >>>
> >>> Hi, Fei.
> >>>
> >>> Does this uAPI update also affect any discrete GPUs supported by i915,
> >>
> >> It does.
> >>
> >>> And in that case, does it allow setting non-snooping PAT indices on
> >>> those devices?
> >>
> >> It allows setting PAT indices specified in
> >> KMD does a sanity check so that it won't go over the max recommended
> >> by bspec.
> >>
> >>> If so, since the uAPI for discrete GPU devices doesn't allow 
> incoherency
> >>> between GPU and CPU (apart from write-combining buffering), the 
> correct
> >>> CPU caching mode matching the PAT index needs to be selected for the
> >>> buffer object in i915_ttm_select_tt_caching().
> >>
> >> The patch doesn't affect the CPU caching mode setting logic though.
> >> And the caching settings for objects created by kernel should remain
> >> the same for both CPU and GPU, objects created by userspace are
> >> managed completely by userspace.
> >>
> >> One question though, what do you mean by non-snooping PAT indices?
> >
> > Yes, that was actually the bottom question: What do these PAT settings
> > allow you to do WRT the snooping on supported discrete devices (DG2) on
> > i915?
> > If they indeed don't allow disabling snooping, then that's not a 
> problem.
>
> When dGPU's access SysMem, the PCIe default is for that access to 
> snoop the
> host's caches. All of our current dGPU's do that -- independent of PAT 
> setting.
>
> > If they do, the ttm code there needs some modification.
>
> I'm not familiar with ttm, but if your concern is that certain PAT index
> could disable snooping, that is not possible for current dGPU's.
> I think it is possible for Xe2/3 though, because there will be COH_MODE
> defined in the PAT registers going forward.


OK. If that's the case, then it should be safe to disregard this concern.

Thanks,


Thomas



>
> -Fei
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20230429/badefb9c/attachment.htm>