Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: use drm_mm_remove_node instead of put_block
Hi On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch wrote: When converting to the preallocated drm_mm_node interfaces in commit dc9dd7a20fde95aa81a8307cde79c2dff9f83f3d Author: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 7 20:37:07 2012 + drm/i915: Preallocate the drm_mm_node prior to manipulating the GTT drm_mm only the allocation side was converted, but not the freeing. Fix this up. Note that the only difference between put_block and remove_node is that the former fills up the preallocation cache. Which we don't need anyway and hence is just wasted space. Cc: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Cc: Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c index 4200c32..30fd694 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c @@ -2620,7 +2620,7 @@ i915_gem_object_unbind(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) /* Avoid an unnecessary call to unbind on rebind. */ obj-map_and_fenceable = true; - drm_mm_put_block(obj-gtt_space); + drm_mm_remove_node(obj-gtt_space); kfree(obj-gtt_space); obj-gtt_space = NULL; obj-gtt_offset = 0; @@ -3137,14 +3137,14 @@ search_free: } if (WARN_ON(!i915_gem_valid_gtt_space(dev, node, obj-cache_level))) { i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj); - drm_mm_put_block(node); + drm_mm_remove_node(node); kfree(node); return -EINVAL; } ret = i915_gem_gtt_prepare_object(obj); if (ret) { i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj); - drm_mm_put_block(node); + drm_mm_remove_node(node); kfree(node); drm_mm_remove_node() does unlink the node but not remove it. Btw., I have these fixes in my series, too. I will push it later and write the git-link to #dri-devel. Cheers David return ret; } -- 1.7.11.7 ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: use drm_mm_remove_node instead of put_block
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 09:16:56PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:05:54PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: When converting to the preallocated drm_mm_node interfaces in commit dc9dd7a20fde95aa81a8307cde79c2dff9f83f3d Author: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 7 20:37:07 2012 + drm/i915: Preallocate the drm_mm_node prior to manipulating the GTT drm_mm only the allocation side was converted, but not the freeing. Fix this up. Note that the only difference between put_block and remove_node is that the former fills up the preallocation cache. Which we don't need anyway and hence is just wasted space. Cc: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Cc: Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch You learn something new every day. Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk The lack of kfree in this patch might be a problem ... /me tries again -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: use drm_mm_remove_node instead of put_block
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:21:57PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote: Hi On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch wrote: When converting to the preallocated drm_mm_node interfaces in commit dc9dd7a20fde95aa81a8307cde79c2dff9f83f3d Author: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 7 20:37:07 2012 + drm/i915: Preallocate the drm_mm_node prior to manipulating the GTT drm_mm only the allocation side was converted, but not the freeing. Fix this up. Note that the only difference between put_block and remove_node is that the former fills up the preallocation cache. Which we don't need anyway and hence is just wasted space. Cc: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Cc: Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c index 4200c32..30fd694 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c @@ -2620,7 +2620,7 @@ i915_gem_object_unbind(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) /* Avoid an unnecessary call to unbind on rebind. */ obj-map_and_fenceable = true; - drm_mm_put_block(obj-gtt_space); + drm_mm_remove_node(obj-gtt_space); kfree(obj-gtt_space); obj-gtt_space = NULL; obj-gtt_offset = 0; @@ -3137,14 +3137,14 @@ search_free: } if (WARN_ON(!i915_gem_valid_gtt_space(dev, node, obj-cache_level))) { i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj); - drm_mm_put_block(node); + drm_mm_remove_node(node); kfree(node); return -EINVAL; } ret = i915_gem_gtt_prepare_object(obj); if (ret) { i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj); - drm_mm_put_block(node); + drm_mm_remove_node(node); kfree(node); Yeah, I fail ... drm_mm_remove_node() does unlink the node but not remove it. Btw., I have these fixes in my series, too. I will push it later and write the git-link to #dri-devel. We have patches in-flight to convert over to embedded drm_mm_nodes anyway, so I guess that part will solve itself automatically. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: use drm_mm_remove_node instead of put_block
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:39:03PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:21:57PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote: Hi On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch wrote: When converting to the preallocated drm_mm_node interfaces in commit dc9dd7a20fde95aa81a8307cde79c2dff9f83f3d Author: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Date: Fri Dec 7 20:37:07 2012 + drm/i915: Preallocate the drm_mm_node prior to manipulating the GTT drm_mm only the allocation side was converted, but not the freeing. Fix this up. Note that the only difference between put_block and remove_node is that the former fills up the preallocation cache. Which we don't need anyway and hence is just wasted space. Cc: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Cc: Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c index 4200c32..30fd694 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c @@ -2620,7 +2620,7 @@ i915_gem_object_unbind(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) /* Avoid an unnecessary call to unbind on rebind. */ obj-map_and_fenceable = true; - drm_mm_put_block(obj-gtt_space); + drm_mm_remove_node(obj-gtt_space); kfree(obj-gtt_space); obj-gtt_space = NULL; obj-gtt_offset = 0; @@ -3137,14 +3137,14 @@ search_free: } if (WARN_ON(!i915_gem_valid_gtt_space(dev, node, obj-cache_level))) { i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj); - drm_mm_put_block(node); + drm_mm_remove_node(node); kfree(node); return -EINVAL; } ret = i915_gem_gtt_prepare_object(obj); if (ret) { i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(obj); - drm_mm_put_block(node); + drm_mm_remove_node(node); kfree(node); Yeah, I fail ... drm_mm_remove_node() does unlink the node but not remove it. Btw., I have these fixes in my series, too. I will push it later and write the git-link to #dri-devel. We have patches in-flight to convert over to embedded drm_mm_nodes anyway, so I guess that part will solve itself automatically. -Daniel I'm planning to get this out ASAP. I'm a bit confused now though what I actually need to send. -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: use drm_mm_remove_node instead of put_block
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote: drm_mm_remove_node() does unlink the node but not remove it. Btw., I have these fixes in my series, too. I will push it later and write the git-link to #dri-devel. We have patches in-flight to convert over to embedded drm_mm_nodes anyway, so I guess that part will solve itself automatically. I'm planning to get this out ASAP. I'm a bit confused now though what I actually need to send. I think for now just the top-down allocator + the create_node stuff for stolen memory. I guess the conversion to embed the gtt_space drm_mm_node will take a bit longer. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel