Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 14:29 +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>   
>> Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 13:51 +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems my path for bo move from system to vram is completely
>>>>> wrong, i really have hard time to understand this bo move it
>>>>> looks way more complicated than it should be. Here is what i
>>>>> do.
>>>>>
>>>>> tmp_mem = *old_mem;
>>>>> tmp_mem.mm_node = NULL;
>>>>> tmp_mem.proposed_flags = TTM_PL_FLAG_TT | TTM_PL_MASK_CACHING;
>>>>> r = ttm_bo_mem_space(bo, &tmp_mem, interruptible, no_wait);
>>>>> r = ttm_bo_move_ttm(bo, true, no_wait, &tmp_mem);
>>>>> r = radeon_move_blit(bo, true, no_wait, new_mem, old_mem);
>>>>> accel_cleanup
>>>>>
>>>>> So now on resume i get a bind of 0 pages because
>>>>> bo->ttm.state != unpopulated. Before resume this path seems
>>>>> to work fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Am i doing somethings wrong ?
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> The question is then how you get an unpopulated ttm without any pages in 
>>>> it?
>>>> If it's swapped, then the state should indeed be unpopulated.
>>>>
>>>> Also, why do you pass old_mem to radeon_move_blit, as that should point 
>>>> to a system region that
>>>> is no longer valid?
>>>>
>>>> /Thomas
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> bo->ttm exist and seems to have pages in it. in ttm_bo_move_ttm
>>> *old_mem = tmp_mem so when i do move_blit with old_mem it's in
>>> fact using the tmp mem allocated.
>>>   
>>>       
>> Hmm. That's a bit confusing to me. Can't radeon_blit just use bo->mem?
>> Anyway, you say you get a bind operation of 0 pages?  Why is the ttm_tt 
>> code not doing the bind?
>>
>> /Thomas
>>
>>     
>
> It's confusing for me too, radeon_blit is just a blit function don't
> do anythings beside emitting blit gpu command and a fence. It's the
> ttm_tt code which calls bind.
>
> So ttm_tt_bind is called by ttm_bo_move_ttm, ttm_tt_bind call populate
> but state != unpopulated thus populate return right away, then
> ttm_tt_bind call driver callback bind but what i have in the ttm_backend
> object is 0 pages so i am asked to bind 0 pages.
>
> I can't make sense of the call chain, i will dump the whole object
> before and after suspend.
>
>   
This sounds like the ttm::state and the backend is out-of-sync.
So the only place I can find, where the ttm state can transition from  
ttm_unpopulated is in
ttm_tt_populate, with one exception:

If ttm_tt_unbind is called while the TT is not in the bound state, when 
ttm->state == ttm_unpopulated,
it may transition from ttm_unpopulated to ttm_unbound.

So in ttm_tt_unbind, if you put the
ttm->state = ttm_unbound

within the if statement, that help finding out what's going wrong.

/Thomas



> Cheers,
> Jerome
>
>   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and 
around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
$200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. 
Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to