Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Restore all GGTT VMAs on resume

From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Restore all GGTT VMAs on resume
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 11:32:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150708093207.GH7568@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150706151901.GK5312@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>

On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 04:19:01PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 03:15:01PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > 
> > When rotated and partial views were added no one spotted the resume
> > path which assumes only one GGTT VMA per object and hence is now
> > skipping rebind of alternative views.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > Similarly to my recent debugfs patch, it would seem quicker path could
> > be to walk GGTT active & inactive lists, but I assume we want to call
> > i915_gem_clflush_object only once per object which would make that
> > problematic.

Patch is missing offending commit that introduce this issue and which
platforms are affected (I guess all due to partial view?). Also should be
cc: stable I presume?

Can you please supply this so I can ammend the commit message? Applied to
-fixes meanwhile, thanks.
-Daniel

> 
> It's a bit easier because there are no active entries after suspend, and
> we may not care too much for over clflushing.
> 
> We should actually clear the GGTT of all but pinned entries on
> hibernate (which would save a bunch of work on early resume), and there
> are a bunch of non-objects inside the GGTT that should be evicted/restored
> properly. (Would have been trivial had we made them all objects in the
> first place.)
> 
> The patch is in the right direction and the other issues are present
> irrespective of this patch.
> 
> I guess a begrudingly
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> -Chris
> 
> -- 
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx