From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB988C00144 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:27:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233973AbiHAU1A (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2022 16:27:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40222 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229901AbiHAU07 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2022 16:26:59 -0400 Received: from madras.collabora.co.uk (madras.collabora.co.uk [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:25:2eeb:e5ab]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7B3E2980E; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:26:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.145] (109-252-119-232.nat.spd-mgts.ru [109.252.119.232]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dmitry.osipenko) by madras.collabora.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA93A6601B2B; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 21:26:56 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1659385617; bh=qlDRiXQtVbqNkSmU8Cnqt3nNqlrAXRi8L9E+dfgRTgw=; h=Date:Subject:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=T6C413GV9u9auBKBUGPwrUqFub8g8kd4CuR1LPJpWJvYr19sZmMv4B5vMoWJ4FHQF 4qa3OBtA4YizFC4Kcfzdty7oaMMi4EtASju5M0z9qI0qyYrXkavVRc1pzU4508/z4N Cfph7BTAnZoJfh99KQQESKatS1P5Ieosqe5udCGdFpOjf5oFcXUp2gkLz/TwE6DgWT a58nEzUsPhD4Jj5dPciHvife+/zM7oBRfSTazPXG1XC/zXNGNGtq4vFMh0K17HOh87 XtShsIO4NZrHw/TycCFI4aOql8Eq5EG2A1H/F8lQ2bZbVQHQiMJWIAb4zazEudLtpo Oj8HWXnrCGy/Q== Message-ID: <88576d7a-da5f-753d-51cf-08ed22f7c81e@collabora.com> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 23:26:54 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/15] drm/gem: Add LRU/shrinker helper Content-Language: en-US From: Dmitry Osipenko To: Rob Clark Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Rob Clark , Daniel Vetter , Thomas Zimmermann , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , David Airlie , open list References: <20220726175043.1027731-1-robdclark@gmail.com> <20220726175043.1027731-10-robdclark@gmail.com> <6b35b912-68e5-e722-0b5a-0f7bd06c22c2@collabora.com> <733f5d3f-293e-f951-a00b-fcd3052f68e7@collabora.com> In-Reply-To: <733f5d3f-293e-f951-a00b-fcd3052f68e7@collabora.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 8/1/22 23:13, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > On 8/1/22 23:11, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> On 8/1/22 23:00, Rob Clark wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 12:41 PM Dmitry Osipenko >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 7/26/22 20:50, Rob Clark wrote: >>>>> +/** >>>>> + * drm_gem_lru_remove - remove object from whatever LRU it is in >>>>> + * >>>>> + * If the object is currently in any LRU, remove it. >>>>> + * >>>>> + * @obj: The GEM object to remove from current LRU >>>>> + */ >>>>> +void >>>>> +drm_gem_lru_remove(struct drm_gem_object *obj) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + struct drm_gem_lru *lru = obj->lru; >>>>> + >>>>> + if (!lru) >>>>> + return; >>>>> + >>>>> + mutex_lock(lru->lock); >>>>> + lru_remove(obj); >>>>> + mutex_unlock(lru->lock); >>>>> +} >>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_gem_lru_remove); >>>> >>>> I made a preliminary port of the DRM-SHMEM shrinker on top of the the >>>> latest version of dma-buf locking convention and yours LRU patches. It >>>> all works good, the only thing that is missing for the DRM-SHMEM >>>> shrinker is the drm_gem_lru_remove_locked(). >>>> >>>> What about to add a locked variant of drm_gem_lru_remove()? >>> >>> Sounds fine to me.. the only reason it didn't exist yet was because it >>> wasn't needed yet.. >> >> There is no use for the drm_gem_lru_move_tail_locked() as well, you're >> not using it in the MSM driver. Hence I thought it might be good to add >> the drm_gem_lru_remove_locked(), or maybe the >> drm_gem_lru_move_tail_locked() should be dropped then? >> >>> I can respin w/ an addition of a _locked() version, or you can add it >>> on top in your patchset. Either is fine by me >> >> The either option is fine by me too. If you'll keep the unused >> drm_gem_lru_move_tail_locked(), then will be nice to add >> drm_gem_lru_remove_locked(). >> > > The drm_gem_lru_move_tail_locked() will be needed by DRM-SHMEM shrinker, > BTW. On the other hand, I see now that DRM-SHMEM shrinker can use the unlocked versions only. Hence both drm_gem_lru_move_tail_locked() and drm_gem_lru_remove_locked() aren't needed. -- Best regards, Dmitry