All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch, airlied@gmail.com,
	intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH 4/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark GPU VA as complete.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:30:04 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230829163005.54067-4-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230829163005.54067-1-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>

Nouveau has landed the GPU VA helpers, support and documentation
already and Xe is already using the upstream GPU VA.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
 Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst | 36 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
index a115526c03e0..b67f8e6a1825 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
@@ -88,24 +88,6 @@ depend on any other patch touching drm_scheduler itself that was not yet merged
 through drm-misc. This, by itself, already includes the reach of an agreement for
 uniform 1 to 1 relationship implementation / usage across drivers.
 
-GPU VA
-------
-Two main goals of Xe are meeting together here:
-
-1) Have an uAPI that aligns with modern UMD needs.
-
-2) Early upstream engagement.
-
-RedHat engineers working on Nouveau proposed a new DRM feature to handle keeping
-track of GPU virtual address mappings. This is still not merged upstream, but
-this aligns very well with our goals and with our VM_BIND. The engagement with
-upstream and the port of Xe towards GPUVA is already ongoing.
-
-As a key measurable result, Xe needs to be aligned with the GPU VA and working in
-our tree. Missing Nouveau patches should *not* block Xe and any needed GPUVA
-related patch should be independent and present on dri-devel or acked by
-maintainers to go along with the first Xe pull request towards drm-next.
-
 ASYNC VM_BIND
 -------------
 Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
@@ -230,3 +212,21 @@ Xe merged, it is mandatory to enforce the overall locking scheme for all major
 structs and list (so vm and vma). So, a consensus is needed, and possibly some
 common helpers. If helpers are needed, they should be also documented in this
 document.
+
+GPU VA
+------
+Two main goals of Xe are meeting together here:
+
+1) Have an uAPI that aligns with modern UMD needs.
+
+2) Early upstream engagement.
+
+RedHat engineers working on Nouveau proposed a new DRM feature to handle keeping
+track of GPU virtual address mappings. This is still not merged upstream, but
+this aligns very well with our goals and with our VM_BIND. The engagement with
+upstream and the port of Xe towards GPUVA is already ongoing.
+
+As a key measurable result, Xe needs to be aligned with the GPU VA and working in
+our tree. Missing Nouveau patches should *not* block Xe and any needed GPUVA
+related patch should be independent and present on dri-devel or acked by
+maintainers to go along with the first Xe pull request towards drm-next.
-- 
2.41.0


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark GPU VA as complete.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:30:04 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230829163005.54067-4-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230829163005.54067-1-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>

Nouveau has landed the GPU VA helpers, support and documentation
already and Xe is already using the upstream GPU VA.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
 Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst | 36 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
index a115526c03e0..b67f8e6a1825 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
@@ -88,24 +88,6 @@ depend on any other patch touching drm_scheduler itself that was not yet merged
 through drm-misc. This, by itself, already includes the reach of an agreement for
 uniform 1 to 1 relationship implementation / usage across drivers.
 
-GPU VA
-------
-Two main goals of Xe are meeting together here:
-
-1) Have an uAPI that aligns with modern UMD needs.
-
-2) Early upstream engagement.
-
-RedHat engineers working on Nouveau proposed a new DRM feature to handle keeping
-track of GPU virtual address mappings. This is still not merged upstream, but
-this aligns very well with our goals and with our VM_BIND. The engagement with
-upstream and the port of Xe towards GPUVA is already ongoing.
-
-As a key measurable result, Xe needs to be aligned with the GPU VA and working in
-our tree. Missing Nouveau patches should *not* block Xe and any needed GPUVA
-related patch should be independent and present on dri-devel or acked by
-maintainers to go along with the first Xe pull request towards drm-next.
-
 ASYNC VM_BIND
 -------------
 Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
@@ -230,3 +212,21 @@ Xe merged, it is mandatory to enforce the overall locking scheme for all major
 structs and list (so vm and vma). So, a consensus is needed, and possibly some
 common helpers. If helpers are needed, they should be also documented in this
 document.
+
+GPU VA
+------
+Two main goals of Xe are meeting together here:
+
+1) Have an uAPI that aligns with modern UMD needs.
+
+2) Early upstream engagement.
+
+RedHat engineers working on Nouveau proposed a new DRM feature to handle keeping
+track of GPU virtual address mappings. This is still not merged upstream, but
+this aligns very well with our goals and with our VM_BIND. The engagement with
+upstream and the port of Xe towards GPUVA is already ongoing.
+
+As a key measurable result, Xe needs to be aligned with the GPU VA and working in
+our tree. Missing Nouveau patches should *not* block Xe and any needed GPUVA
+related patch should be independent and present on dri-devel or acked by
+maintainers to go along with the first Xe pull request towards drm-next.
-- 
2.41.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-08-29 16:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-29 16:30 [Intel-xe] [PATCH 1/4] drm/doc/rfc: No STAGING out of drivers/staging Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 2/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark Dev_coredump as completed Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 3/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark DRM_VM_BIND as complete Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:10   ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:10     ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-04 21:32     ` [Intel-xe] " Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-04 21:32       ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-06 17:57       ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-06 17:57         ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2023-08-29 16:30   ` [PATCH 4/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark GPU VA " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:17   ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:17     ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-04 21:39     ` [Intel-xe] " Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-04 21:39       ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-06 18:03       ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-06 18:03         ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:44 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.Patch_applied: failure for series starting with [1/4] drm/doc/rfc: No STAGING out of drivers/staging Patchwork
2023-08-29 17:35 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 1/4] " Lucas De Marchi
2023-08-29 17:35   ` Lucas De Marchi
2023-08-31  8:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2023-08-31  8:31   ` Daniel Vetter
2023-08-31 19:08   ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:08     ` Rodrigo Vivi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230829163005.54067-4-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.