Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/1] drm: Add a gpu page-table walker

[Stanislaw Gruszka <stanislaw.gruszka@linux.intel.com>]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 09:09:14AM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> Hi, Oded.
> 
> On 2/26/23 19:56, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 8:50 PM Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:03 AM Thomas Hellström
> > > <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi, Daniel,
> > > > 
> > > > On 2/16/23 21:18, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 05:27:28PM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> > > > > > A slightly unusual cover letter for a single patch.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The page table walker is currently used by the xe driver only,
> > > > > > but the code is generic so we can be good citizens and add it to drm
> > > > > > as a helper, for possible use by other drivers,
> > > > > > If so we can merge the commit when we merge the xe driver.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The question raised here is
> > > > > > *) Should it be a generic drm helper or xe-specific with changed
> > > > > >      prefixes?
> > > > > I think if there's some other drivers interested in using this, then this
> > > > > sounds like a good idea. Maybe more useful if it's also integrated into
> > > > > the vm/vma helpers that are being discussed as an optional part?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe some good old sales pitching here to convince people would be good.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe one of the new accel drivers is interested in this too?
> > Hi,
> > As the habanalabs driver is not really a new driver, I currently don't
> > see the benefit of moving
> > to this code. Our pgt code is quite mature and was tested extensively
> > in deployment in the
> > past couple of years.
> > 
> > Nevertheless, I'll try to offer this code for any new/future driver
> > that will want to join accel.
> > 
> > Stanislaw, I'm adding you here in case you missed this. Might be of an
> > interest to you.

Rewrite table walk will not give the ivpu driver much, perhaps one function
would be smaller. Nothing that would justify the effort IMO.

> Thanks for taking a look. Yes, as also mentioned to Alex, I think we'll keep
> this in xe for now.

Sounds good :-)

Regards
Stanislaw