From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AF262DAFD9 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 11:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755777209; cv=none; b=bjEycuK1msRj2/fu2+JGQRv6hHM/9JzgJrOnvW/68N3uOM32e1mRAj2A60oz3HmPA5JtUXIljPGdbPeh9rtt0cc282UzbG7HM9CKNJM29W43mQDWU5/s+so9oavCk7XzeQfyEwJvYWwt3MaE0MVOAwmUWcX5fawjBcvutrRK9U0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755777209; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gj8Ewp98g6KH3AuYkRIp4/z6BIYMV5RScmMuaTBfZz0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=HTBCYtfdSv+x+Lpzvap+oHu++aysqV42VdKi6mXdoG/yOrB4Ys4eTSmFLgz7sy0xbmNOX1G00Vvt6cNS0aa9ZBHRTzzQuH5BLSL7UlI7d1rL/b11d+5QJq+VSXaII1InXLgsJg1XjtBSUImVwEcqAt2k7OMW5smmkRWdYBDgWbI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=OtMwwDtm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="OtMwwDtm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1755777206; bh=gj8Ewp98g6KH3AuYkRIp4/z6BIYMV5RScmMuaTBfZz0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=OtMwwDtmwa/O7ggrird2cGFI/hroLbmib4VzTSaghb7/uOklbpvCSFe9mZZoGodol 7NYNjM26c0+wW/QA95kR/E6UCcsSpc5wcVo90h5eEXfV9nKxlSEyuarkJw+5jIEOU4 ugO/IkuZjikRGQsSnH+MiASOer3itiHp2tsSVYiCWsjkZXTQd960IYyen1pEYg137H aBi9t7TDJUNqSHuPrhu0mIGBArA9MD1h7M79wC0HyvCkG2vjFu5bBxpuJEtIb1Mssd brpaYAQPly2x+LErjxR16y0mXIXd7rZG9nRoledFXM9guZnoyiZML7x1DidHwZjJ0Z VkBIHzzD9MLPA== Received: from fedora (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0a:2c:6930:d919:a6e:5ea1:8a9f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bbrezillon) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8EBAB17E127B; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:53:25 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:53:20 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: "Danilo Krummrich" Cc: "Caterina Shablia" , "Maarten Lankhorst" , "Maxime Ripard" , "Thomas Zimmermann" , "David Airlie" , "Simona Vetter" , "Frank Binns" , "Matt Coster" , "Karol Herbst" , "Lyude Paul" , "Steven Price" , "Liviu Dudau" , "Lucas De Marchi" , Thomas =?UTF-8?B?SGVsbHN0csO2bQ==?= , "Rodrigo Vivi" , , , , , , "Asahi Lina" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] drm/gpuvm: Pass map arguments through a struct Message-ID: <20250821135320.670f2409@fedora> In-Reply-To: References: <20250707170442.1437009-1-caterina.shablia@collabora.com> <20250707170442.1437009-4-caterina.shablia@collabora.com> Organization: Collabora X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.49; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: asahi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 07 Jul 2025 20:44:49 +0200 "Danilo Krummrich" wrote: > On Mon Jul 7, 2025 at 7:04 PM CEST, Caterina Shablia wrote: > > +/** > > + * struct drm_gpuvm_map_req - arguments passed to drm_gpuvm_sm_map[_ops_create]() > > + */ > > +struct drm_gpuvm_map_req { > > + /** @va: virtual address related fields */ > > + struct { > > + /** @va.addr: start of the virtual address range to map to */ > > + u64 addr; > > + > > + /** @va.size: size of the virtual address range to map to */ > > + u64 range; > > + } va; > > + > > + /** @gem: GEM related fields */ > > + struct { > > + /** > > + * @obj: GEM object to map. > > + * > > + * Can be NULL if the virtual range is not backed by a GEM object. > > + */ > > + struct drm_gem_object *obj; > > + > > + /** @offset: offset in the GEM */ > > + u64 offset; > > + } gem; > > +}; > > Can't we just use struct drm_gpuva_op_map instead? The structure is identical > and represents exactly what we want, a map operation. Sure, we can do that. The only reason I didn't is because I thought it was preferable to distinguish a map request from the sub-operation it might be split into (the latter being described by drm_gpuva_op_map). > > Let's use that instead of redefining an identical structure. > > With that, > > Acked-by: Danilo Krummrich