On 11/2/20 9:48 AM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Op 30-10-2020 om 16:08 schreef Thomas Hellström:
On 10/16/20 12:44 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Pin in the caller, not in the work itself. This should also
work better for dma-fence annotations.
Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_clflush.c | 15 +++++++--------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_clflush.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_clflush.c
index bc0223716906..daf9284ef1f5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_clflush.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_clflush.c
@@ -27,15 +27,8 @@ static void __do_clflush(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
static int clflush_work(struct dma_fence_work *base)
{
struct clflush *clflush = container_of(base, typeof(*clflush), base);
- struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = clflush->obj;
- int err;
- err = i915_gem_object_pin_pages(obj);
- if (err)
- return err;
-
- __do_clflush(obj);
- i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj);
+ __do_clflush(clflush->obj);
return 0;
}
@@ -44,6 +37,7 @@ static void clflush_release(struct dma_fence_work *base)
{
struct clflush *clflush = container_of(base, typeof(*clflush), base);
+ i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(clflush->obj);
Hmm, Could we do without pinning here? Pages present are protected first by the
object lock, then by the fence?
/Thomas
I felt the least chance of regressions was to copy the existing code. :)
At least until we have completed obj->mm.lock removal, we shouldn't try to be
smart with these kind of things.
Likely, we've already pinned the pages, so it's a simple ref increase.
Later on, we can try to be smart, but whenever I tried to change behavior so
far, I was forced to hunt down bugs.
OK, sounds good.
/Thomas
~Maarten
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
