Re: [PATCH v3 08/15] drm/i915: Functions to support command submission via GuC

[Yu Dai <yu.dai@intel.com>]

On 04/20/2015 12:43 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:07:28AM -0700, Yu Dai wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 04/18/2015 06:48 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > >On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 02:21:13PM -0700, yu.dai@intel.com wrote:
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> > >> index de8c074..8f13e80 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> > >> @@ -1993,7 +1993,7 @@ static int intel_init_ring_buffer(struct drm_device *dev,
> > >>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ring->request_list);
> > >>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ring->execlist_queue);
> > >>  	i915_gem_batch_pool_init(dev, &ring->batch_pool);
> > >> -	ringbuf->size = 32 * PAGE_SIZE;
> > >> +	ringbuf->size = 4 * PAGE_SIZE;
> > >>  	ringbuf->ring = ring;
> > >>  	memset(ring->semaphore.sync_seqno, 0, sizeof(ring->semaphore.sync_seqno));
> > >
> > >NAK.
> > >
> > First of all, GuC firmware reserves limited bits for ring buffer. 4
> > pages is max for now. Second, considering the ring buffer is
> > per-context now, there is no need to allocate 32 pages for it.
>
> Please look at which function you are changing and explain how this is
> not in the least broken.
>
You are right, Chris. I should not touch this legacy ringbuf submission. 
Thanks for catch this.

Thanks,
Alex
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx