Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-25 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 06:04:57PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:37:42PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >>Jerome Glisse wrote: > >>>On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 02:05:50PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Mon, Feb

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-24 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:37:42PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >> Jerome Glisse wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 02:05:50PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: >>> Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:58:28PM +0100, Thom

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-24 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:37:42PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 02:05:50PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >>Jerome Glisse wrote: > >>>On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:58:28PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Mon, Feb

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-24 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 02:05:50PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >> Jerome Glisse wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:58:28PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: >>> Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 06:30:24PM +0100, Thom

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-24 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 02:05:50PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:58:28PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >>Jerome Glisse wrote: > >>>On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 06:30:24PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >Thomas i th

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-23 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:58:28PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >> Jerome Glisse wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 06:30:24PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: >>> Jerome Glisse wrote: > Thomas i think i addressed your concern here,

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-23 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:58:28PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 06:30:24PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >>Jerome Glisse wrote: > >>>Thomas i think i addressed your concern here, the ttm_bo_validate > >>>didn't needed a new argument or i did no

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-22 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 06:30:24PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >> Jerome Glisse wrote: >> >>> Thomas i think i addressed your concern here, the ttm_bo_validate >>> didn't needed a new argument or i did not understand what was >>> necessary beside no_wait. In this

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-22 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 06:30:24PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > Jerome Glisse wrote: > > Thomas i think i addressed your concern here, the ttm_bo_validate > > didn't needed a new argument or i did not understand what was > > necessary beside no_wait. In this patchset we check the value > > of c

Re: Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-22 Thread Thomas Hellstrom
Jerome Glisse wrote: > Thomas i think i addressed your concern here, the ttm_bo_validate > didn't needed a new argument or i did not understand what was > necessary beside no_wait. In this patchset we check the value > of callback in case of EBUSY (call set_need_resched) or ERESTARTSYS > we return

Unmappable VRAM patchset V3

2010-02-22 Thread Jerome Glisse
Thomas i think i addressed your concern here, the ttm_bo_validate didn't needed a new argument or i did not understand what was necessary beside no_wait. In this patchset we check the value of callback in case of EBUSY (call set_need_resched) or ERESTARTSYS we return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE. For the desig