On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:45:56PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:36:23PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:10:13AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 02:11:55PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > > >  static int gen6_ppgtt_init(struct i915_hw_ppgtt *ppgtt)
> > > >  {
> > > > +#define GEN6_PD_ALIGN (PAGE_SIZE * 16)
> > > > +#define GEN6_PD_SIZE (GEN6_PPGTT_PD_ENTRIES * PAGE_SIZE)
> > > >         struct drm_device *dev = ppgtt->base.dev;
> > > >         struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
> > > > -       unsigned first_pd_entry_in_global_pt;
> > > > -       int i;
> > > > -       int ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > > +       int i, ret;
> > > >  
> > > > -       /* ppgtt PDEs reside in the global gtt pagetable, which has 
> > > > 512*1024
> > > > -        * entries. For aliasing ppgtt support we just steal them at 
> > > > the end for
> > > > -        * now. */
> > > > -       first_pd_entry_in_global_pt = gtt_total_entries(dev_priv->gtt);
> > > > +       /* PPGTT PDEs reside in the GGTT and consists of 512 entries. 
> > > > The
> > > > +        * allocator works in address space sizes, so it's multiplied 
> > > > by page
> > > > +        * size. We allocate at the top of the GTT to avoid 
> > > > fragmentation.
> > > > +        */
> > > > +       BUG_ON(!drm_mm_initialized(&dev_priv->gtt.base.mm));
> > > > +       ret = 
> > > > drm_mm_insert_node_in_range_generic(&dev_priv->gtt.base.mm,
> > > > +                                                 &ppgtt->node, 
> > > > GEN6_PD_SIZE,
> > > > +                                                 GEN6_PD_ALIGN, 0,
> > > > +                                                 0, 
> > > > dev_priv->gtt.base.total,
> > > > +                                                 
> > > > DRM_MM_SEARCH_DEFAULT);
> > > This could use the simpler drm_mm_insert_node_generic().
> > > -Chris
> > > 
> > 
> > Not with my [simple] workaround to not use offset 0, which Daniel
> > reverted. I think he has some hope that we'll actually be able to figure
> > out why we can't use offset 0 instead of just using the workaround.
> 
> You can simply reduce the drm_mm range...
> -Chris
> 

Yeah, that's a better solution. Patches welcome?

> -- 
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to