Switching over to GEM refcounts and a bunch of cleanups

[Thomas Hellström]

Hi Christian,

On Thu, 2025-08-21 at 14:30 +0200, Christian König wrote:
> On 04.08.25 14:24, Christian König wrote:
> > On 22.07.25 14:36, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> > > Hi, Christian,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2025-07-16 at 18:04 +0200, Christian König wrote:
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > > 
> > > > so I hope Thomas is back from vacation while I will be on
> > > > vacation
> > > > for
> > > > the next two weeks.
> > > > 
> > > > Here is the patch set which cleans up TTM and XE in preperation
> > > > of
> > > > switching to drm_exec.
> > > > 
> > > > Please take a look and let me know what you think about it.
> > > 
> > > I'll take a look.
> > > BTW Did you see my comments on patch 6/6 on v1, essentially I
> > > think
> > > both i915 and xe rejecting some TTM callbacks if the object is a
> > > zombie
> > > (the GEM refcount has reached 0).
> > 
> > Sorry for the delay I'm just back from vacation.
> > 
> > I have seen that XE and i915 is checking the GEM refcount, but I
> > haven't seen your comment on that.
> > 
> > Going to take a look ASAP.
> 
> I'm not able to find that mail.
> 
> All I've seen is your comment on the VMWGFX stuff and that was
> already resolved by Zack.
> 
> What are you referring to?

https://lore.kernel.org/intel-xe/a004736315d77837172418eb196d5b5f80b74e6c.camel@linux.intel.com/

Thanks,
Thomas


> 
> Thanks,
> Christian.
> 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Christian.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Thomas
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Christian.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
>