Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2019-10-28 16:46:46)
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 04:39:50PM +0000, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > There is nothing to say that the obj->base.size is actually a multiple
> > of the block_size.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.a...@intel.com>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c 
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c
> > index 516e61e99212..5597f1345a63 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_blt.c
> > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct i915_vma *intel_emit_vma_fill_blt(struct 
> > intel_context *ce,
> >       GEM_BUG_ON(intel_engine_is_virtual(ce->engine));
> >       intel_engine_pm_get(ce->engine);
> >  
> > -     count = div_u64(vma->size, block_size);
> > +     count = DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP(vma->size, block_size);
> 
> block_size size look to be u32?

And we can control it to be a pot.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to