From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 57/66] drm/i915: Disallow pin with full ppgtt
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 11:27:54 -0700
Message-ID: <20130701182754.GA4242@bwidawsk.net>
References: <1372375867-1003-1-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net>
	<1372375867-1003-58-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net>
	<20130628085527.GB32183@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
	<20130629054329.GA528@bwidawsk.net>
	<20130629064405.GB5210@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
	<CAKMK7uGQcMXpd4PBYKcGEJPLD9PEk+i4yTs8qFURdqAU9aOWUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130630065653.GA6838@bwidawsk.net>
	<20130630110647.GE18285@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<20130630113101.GC7812@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
	<CAKMK7uGzvi9dFPrhpDN0DgDuUvaCX7ft6Y=ig24e-KZNz4B9ug@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from shiva.localdomain (unknown [209.20.75.48])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7655DE5C6E
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon,  1 Jul 2013 11:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uGzvi9dFPrhpDN0DgDuUvaCX7ft6Y=ig24e-KZNz4B9ug@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Intel GFX <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 01:36:39PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > I respectfully disagree. The semantics of the pin ioctl remain useful
> > even with the ggtt/ppgtt split, and I think barring its use forever more
> > is unwise. Not that pinning is a good solution, just in some cases it
> > may be the only solution. (It has proven useful in the past, it is
> > likely to do so again.) All that we need to do is note that the offset
> > returned by pin is ggtt and the offsets used by execbuffer are ppgtt. So
> > keep pin-ioctl and fix the test not to assume that pin.offset is
> > meaningful with execbuffer after HAS_FULL_PPGTT.
> 
> I was eyeing for the most minimal fix, but this is ok with me, too.
> -Daniel
>
So, just fix the test?

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center