Re: [PATCH 1/7] drm/amdgpu: fix VM PD addr shift

[Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling-5C7GfCeVMHo@public.gmane.org>]

On 2017-11-27 11:02 AM, Christian König wrote:
> The block size only affects the leave nodes, everything else is fixed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
> index 122379dfc7d8..f1e541e9b514 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
> @@ -139,6 +139,24 @@ struct amdgpu_prt_cb {
>  };
>  
>  /**
> + * amdgpu_vm_level_shift - return the addr shift for each level
> + *
> + * @adev: amdgpu_device pointer
> + *
> + * Returns the number of bits the pfn needs to be right shifted for a level.
> + */
> +static unsigned amdgpu_vm_level_shift(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
> +				      unsigned level)
> +{
> +	if (level != adev->vm_manager.num_level)
> +		return 9 * (adev->vm_manager.num_level - level - 1) +
> +			adev->vm_manager.block_size;
> +	else
> +		/* For the page tables on the leaves */
> +		return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
>   * amdgpu_vm_num_entries - return the number of entries in a PD/PT
>   *
>   * @adev: amdgpu_device pointer
> @@ -288,8 +306,7 @@ static int amdgpu_vm_alloc_levels(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>  				  uint64_t saddr, uint64_t eaddr,
>  				  unsigned level)
>  {
> -	unsigned shift = (adev->vm_manager.num_level - level) *
> -		adev->vm_manager.block_size;
> +	unsigned shift = amdgpu_vm_level_shift(adev, level);
>  	unsigned pt_idx, from, to;
>  	int r;
>  	u64 flags;
> @@ -1302,18 +1319,19 @@ void amdgpu_vm_get_entry(struct amdgpu_pte_update_params *p, uint64_t addr,
>  			 struct amdgpu_vm_pt **entry,
>  			 struct amdgpu_vm_pt **parent)
>  {
> -	unsigned idx, level = p->adev->vm_manager.num_level;
> +	unsigned level = 0;

This generates a checkpatch.pl warning.

General question: Do you have a policy for running your patches through
checkpatch.pl before/during/after code review? I've noticed before that
some of your patches aren't always 100% compliant.

Regards,
  Felix

>  
>  	*parent = NULL;
>  	*entry = &p->vm->root;
>  	while ((*entry)->entries) {
> -		idx = addr >> (p->adev->vm_manager.block_size * level--);
> +		unsigned idx = addr >> amdgpu_vm_level_shift(p->adev, level++);
> +
>  		idx %= amdgpu_bo_size((*entry)->base.bo) / 8;
>  		*parent = *entry;
>  		*entry = &(*entry)->entries[idx];
>  	}
>  
> -	if (level)
> +	if (level != p->adev->vm_manager.num_level)
>  		*entry = NULL;
>  }
>  

_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx