From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Robert Beckett <bob.beckett@collabora.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 5/7] drm/ttm: add range busy check for range manager
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 15:39:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aedda268-8859-ab42-c276-d3b7cb0533fd@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2a364c03-d6d9-1ccd-2ecb-9ebf893f0860@collabora.com>
Am 16.03.22 um 15:26 schrieb Robert Beckett:
>
> [SNIP]
> this is where I replace an existing range check via drm_mm with the
> range check I added in this patch.
Mhm, I still don't get the use case from the code, but I don't think it
matters any more.
>>> I suppose we could add another drm_mm range tracker just for testing
>>> and shadow track each allocation in the range, but that seemed like
>>> a lot of extra infrastructure for no general runtime use.
>>
>> I have no idea what you mean with that.
>
> I meant as a potential solution to tracking allocations without a
> range check, we would need to add something external. e.g. adding a
> shadow drm_mm range tracker, or a bitmask across the range, or stick
> objects in a list etc.
Ah! So you are trying to get access to the drm_mm inside the
ttm_range_manager and not add some additional range check function! Now
I got your use case.
>>> would you mind explaining the rationale for removing range checks?
>>> It seems to me like a natural fit for a memory manager
>>
>> TTM manages buffer objects and resources, not address space. The
>> lpfn/fpfn parameter for the resource allocators are actually used as
>> just two independent parameters and not define any range. We just
>> keep the names for historical reasons.
>>
>> The only places we still use and compare them as ranges are
>> ttm_resource_compat() and ttm_bo_eviction_valuable() and I already
>> have patches to clean up those and move them into the backend
>> resource handling.
>
> except the ttm_range_manager seems to still use them as a range specifier.
Yeah, because the range manager is the backend which handles ranges
using the drm_mm :)
> If the general design going forward is to not consider ranges, how
> would you recommend constructing buffers around pre-allocated regions
> e.g. uefi frame buffers who's range is dictated externally?
Call ttm_bo_mem_space() with the fpfn/lpfn filled in as required. See
function amdgpu_bo_create_kernel_at() for an example.
Regards,
Christian.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Christian.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Robert Beckett <bob.beckett@collabora.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h | 3 +++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>> index 8cd4f3fb9f79..5662627bb933 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.c
>>>>> @@ -206,3 +206,24 @@ int ttm_range_man_fini_nocheck(struct
>>>>> ttm_device *bdev,
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(ttm_range_man_fini_nocheck);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * ttm_range_man_range_busy - Check whether anything is allocated
>>>>> with a range
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * @man: memory manager to check
>>>>> + * @fpfn: first page number to check
>>>>> + * @lpfn: last page number to check
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * Return: true if anything allocated within the range, false
>>>>> otherwise.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +bool ttm_range_man_range_busy(struct ttm_resource_manager *man,
>>>>> + unsigned fpfn, unsigned lpfn)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct ttm_range_manager *rman = to_range_manager(man);
>>>>> + struct drm_mm *mm = &rman->mm;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (__drm_mm_interval_first(mm, PFN_PHYS(fpfn), PFN_PHYS(lpfn
>>>>> + 1) - 1))
>>>>> + return true;
>>>>> + return false;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ttm_range_man_range_busy);
>>>>> diff --git a/include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h
>>>>> b/include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h
>>>>> index 7963b957e9ef..86794a3f9101 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/drm/ttm/ttm_range_manager.h
>>>>> @@ -53,4 +53,7 @@ static __always_inline int
>>>>> ttm_range_man_fini(struct ttm_device *bdev,
>>>>> BUILD_BUG_ON(__builtin_constant_p(type) && type >=
>>>>> TTM_NUM_MEM_TYPES);
>>>>> return ttm_range_man_fini_nocheck(bdev, type);
>>>>> }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +bool ttm_range_man_range_busy(struct ttm_resource_manager *man,
>>>>> + unsigned fpfn, unsigned lpfn);
>>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-16 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-15 18:04 [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 0/7] drm/i915: ttm for stolen Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 1/7] drm/i915: instantiate ttm ranger manager for stolen memory Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 2/7] drm/i915: add ability to create memory region object in place Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 3/7] drm/i915: use gem objects to track stolen nodes Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 4/7] drm/i915: stolen memory use ttm backend Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 5/7] drm/ttm: add range busy check for range manager Robert Beckett
2022-03-16 9:54 ` Christian König
2022-03-16 13:19 ` Robert Beckett
2022-03-16 13:43 ` Christian König
2022-03-16 14:26 ` Robert Beckett
2022-03-16 14:39 ` Christian König [this message]
2022-03-16 15:28 ` Robert Beckett
2022-03-17 7:00 ` Christian König
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 6/7] drm/i915: add range busy check for ttm region Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 18:04 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH 7/7] drm/i915: cleanup old stolen state Robert Beckett
2022-03-15 19:28 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: ttm for stolen Patchwork
2022-03-15 19:30 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2022-03-15 20:09 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2022-03-15 20:09 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: warning " Patchwork
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=aedda268-8859-ab42-c276-d3b7cb0533fd@amd.com \
--to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=bob.beckett@collabora.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox