From: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
To: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Use ttm_uncached for BO with NEEDS_UC flag
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 20:03:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1b002473-552a-4392-b2b4-b0bdff61c59c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3dd4733f3cc7f322f25354c3e9d4a2dd363d2331.camel@linux.intel.com>
Hi Thomas,
On 11.06.2024 14:47, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> Hi, Michal,
>
> On Thu, 2024-06-06 at 21:56 +0200, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>> We should honor requested uncached mode also at the TTM layer.
>> Otherwise, we risk losing updates to the memory based interrupts
>> source or status vectors, as those require uncached memory.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
>> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>> index 2bae01ce4e5b..2573cc118f29 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
>> @@ -378,6 +378,9 @@ static struct ttm_tt *xe_ttm_tt_create(struct
>> ttm_buffer_object *ttm_bo,
>> (xe->info.graphics_verx100 >= 1270 && bo->flags &
>> XE_BO_FLAG_PAGETABLE))
>> caching = ttm_write_combined;
>>
>> + if (bo->flags & XE_BO_FLAG_NEEDS_UC)
>> + caching = ttm_uncached;
>> +
>> err = ttm_tt_init(&tt->ttm, &bo->ttm, page_flags, caching,
>> extra_pages);
>> if (err) {
>> kfree(tt);
>
> To me the preferred method is to teach bo->cpu_caching about the
> uncached mode and then include it in the switch statement above.
>
but bo->cpu_caching is currently documented as:
/**
* @cpu_caching: CPU caching mode. Currently only used for userspace
* objects.
*/
and value 0 is implicitly reserved as kind of default, so 'teaching'
would likely mean either extending uapi with something like:
#define DRM_XE_GEM_CPU_CACHING_WB 1
#define DRM_XE_GEM_CPU_CACHING_WC 2
+ #define DRM_XE_GEM_CPU_CACHING_UC 3
which will introduce lot of undesired right now code changes, or we will
introduce internal only flag:
+ #define XE_CPU_CACHING_UC ((u16)~0)
but that doesn't look like a clean solution.
OTOH, just above this new diff chunk, there is already a code that
updates caching mode outside the "switch statement above":
if ((!bo->cpu_caching && bo->flags & XE_BO_FLAG_SCANOUT) ||
(xe->info.graphics_verx100 >= 1270 &&
bo->flags & XE_BO_FLAG_PAGETABLE))
caching = ttm_write_combined;
so maybe as a short term solution we can keep this patch as it's doing
similar last resort stuff and return to 'preferred way' later:
if (!bo->cpu_caching && bo->flags & XE_BO_FLAG_NEEDS_UC)
caching = ttm_uncached;
Michal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-12 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-06 19:56 [PATCH] drm/xe: Use ttm_uncached for BO with NEEDS_UC flag Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-06 20:03 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-06-06 20:04 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-06-06 20:06 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-06-06 20:20 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-06-06 20:22 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-06-06 20:24 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-06-06 21:08 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-06-07 6:28 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-06-07 10:11 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-06-11 12:47 ` [PATCH] " Thomas Hellström
2024-06-12 18:03 ` Michal Wajdeczko [this message]
2024-06-17 20:28 ` Matt Roper
2024-06-18 12:38 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-06-18 16:43 ` Matt Roper
2024-06-18 18:29 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-06-18 18:54 ` Matt Roper
2024-06-19 9:44 ` Matthew Auld
2024-06-19 11:40 ` Thomas Hellström
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=1b002473-552a-4392-b2b4-b0bdff61c59c@intel.com \
--to=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.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