Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Am 2021-04-14 um 3:44 a.m. schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: > Hi > > Am 07.04.21 um 21:49 schrieb Felix Kuehling: >> On 2021-04-07 3:34 p.m., Felix Kuehling wrote: >>> On 2021-04-07 7:25 a.m., Christian König wrote: +    /* + * Don't verify access for KFD BOs. They > don't have a

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Am 07.04.21 um 21:49 schrieb Felix Kuehling: On 2021-04-07 3:34 p.m., Felix Kuehling wrote: On 2021-04-07 7:25 a.m., Christian König wrote: +    /* + * Don't verify access for KFD BOs. They don't have a GEM + * object associated with them. + */ +    if (bo->kfd_bo) +   

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Am 07.04.21 um 21:49 schrieb Felix Kuehling: On 2021-04-07 3:34 p.m., Felix Kuehling wrote: On 2021-04-07 7:25 a.m., Christian König wrote: +    /* + * Don't verify access for KFD BOs. They don't have a GEM + * object associated with them. + */ +    if (bo->kfd_bo) +   

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

On 2021-04-07 3:34 p.m., Felix Kuehling wrote: On 2021-04-07 7:25 a.m., Christian König wrote: +    /* + * Don't verify access for KFD BOs. They don't have a GEM + * object associated with them. + */ +    if (bo->kfd_bo) +    goto out; Who does the access verification now?

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

On 2021-04-07 7:25 a.m., Christian König wrote: +    /* + * Don't verify access for KFD BOs. They don't have a GEM + * object associated with them. + */ +    if (bo->kfd_bo) +    goto out; Who does the access verification now? This is somewhat confusing. I took this check

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi, Am 06.04.21 um 17:27 schrieb Felix Kuehling: Am 2021-04-06 um 6:38 a.m. schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 11:35 schrieb Christian König: Am 06.04.21 um 11:08 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Moving the driver-specific mmap code into a GEM object function allows for using DRM

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Am 2021-04-06 um 6:38 a.m. schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: > Hi > > Am 06.04.21 um 11:35 schrieb Christian König: >> Am 06.04.21 um 11:08 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: >>> Moving the driver-specific mmap code into a GEM object function allows >>> for using DRM helpers for various mmap callbacks. >>> >>>

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Am 2021-04-06 um 9:04 a.m. schrieb Christian König: > Am 06.04.21 um 14:52 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: >> Hi >> >> Am 06.04.21 um 14:42 schrieb Christian König: >>> Hi Thomas, >>> >>> Am 06.04.21 um 13:55 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 12:56 schrieb Christian König:

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Am 06.04.21 um 14:52 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 14:42 schrieb Christian König: Hi Thomas, Am 06.04.21 um 13:55 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 12:56 schrieb Christian König: In the end I went with the semantics I found in amdgpu_mmap() and handled KFD

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Am 06.04.21 um 14:42 schrieb Christian König: Hi Thomas, Am 06.04.21 um 13:55 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 12:56 schrieb Christian König: In the end I went with the semantics I found in amdgpu_mmap() and handled KFD specially. Let me know if this requires to be changed.

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Thomas, Am 06.04.21 um 13:55 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 12:56 schrieb Christian König: In the end I went with the semantics I found in amdgpu_mmap() and handled KFD specially. Let me know if this requires to be changed. Well the question is where is the call to

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Am 06.04.21 um 12:56 schrieb Christian König: In the end I went with the semantics I found in amdgpu_mmap() and handled KFD specially. Let me know if this requires to be changed. Well the question is where is the call to drm_vma_node_verify_access() now? Cause that needs to be skipped

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Thomas, Am 06.04.21 um 12:38 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Hi Am 06.04.21 um 11:35 schrieb Christian König: Am 06.04.21 um 11:08 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Moving the driver-specific mmap code into a GEM object function allows for using DRM helpers for various mmap callbacks. This change

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Hi Am 06.04.21 um 11:35 schrieb Christian König: Am 06.04.21 um 11:08 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Moving the driver-specific mmap code into a GEM object function allows for using DRM helpers for various mmap callbacks. This change resolves several inconsistencies between regular mmap and

Re: [PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Am 06.04.21 um 11:08 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: Moving the driver-specific mmap code into a GEM object function allows for using DRM helpers for various mmap callbacks. This change resolves several inconsistencies between regular mmap and prime-based mmap. The vm_ops field in vma is now set for

[PATCH 3/8] drm/amdgpu: Implement mmap as GEM object function

Moving the driver-specific mmap code into a GEM object function allows for using DRM helpers for various mmap callbacks. This change resolves several inconsistencies between regular mmap and prime-based mmap. The vm_ops field in vma is now set for all mmap'ed areas. Previously it way only set for