Re: [PATCH] drm: i915: ensure objects are allocated below 4GB on PAE

2009-05-30 Thread Shaohua Li
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:40:12AM +0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 08:42 +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 08:18:40AM +0800, Kyle McMartin wrote: > > > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:55:50PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > I'm

Re: [PATCH] drm: i915: ensure objects are allocated below 4GB on PAE

2009-05-27 Thread Shaohua Li
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 08:18:40AM +0800, Kyle McMartin wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:55:50PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > I'm confused: I thought GFP_DMA32 only applies on x86_64: > > my 32-bit PAE machine with (slightly!) > 4GB shows no ZONE_DMA32. > > Does this patch perhaps depend on an

[RFC]DRM: limit gem object memory below 4G

2009-05-19 Thread Shaohua Li
Limit gem object mapping to below 4G. This fixes two issues: 1. remove limit that gem can't be enabled with PAE 2. in x64, shmem page can be higher than 4G, but for example, 945G GTT mapping can only handle 4G mapping. Am I missing anything? Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li --- drivers/gp

Re: PROBLEM: 2.6.29.2 - AGP doesn't work anymore on my nforce2

2009-05-17 Thread Shaohua Li
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 08:31 +0200, Karsten Mehrhoff wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 04 May 2009 03:41:51 +0200, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > >>> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 09:22:19PM +0800, kaw...@gmx.de wrote: > > > >>>>> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 17:59 -0700,

Re: PROBLEM: 2.6.29.2 - AGP doesn't work anymore on my nforce2

2009-05-04 Thread Shaohua Li
On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 09:22:19PM +0800, kaw...@gmx.de wrote: > > On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 17:59 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:51:47 +0200 > >> Karsten Mehrhoff wrote: > >> > >>> [1.] > >>> PROBLEM: No more agp card functionality with the patch 2.6.29.2 of > >> 'a/drivers

Re: [RFC] drm: drm_lock possible error

2009-04-24 Thread Shaohua Li
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 16:10 +0800, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Dave Airlie wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > >> drm_lock() does: > >>for (;;) { > >>__set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); >

[RFC] drm: drm_lock possible error

2009-04-21 Thread Shaohua Li
k but set to interruptible, then nobody can wakeup the task (except signal) and other tasks can't get the lock again. Am I missing anything? Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_lock.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_lock.c index e2f70a5..32fbca0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/d