Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3] tests/prime_vgem: Examine blitter access path

2020-02-12 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2020-02-12 09:08:53) > Hi Chris, > > On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 12:39:36 PM CET Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2020-02-04 11:41:13) > > > On future hardware with missing GGTT BAR we won't be able to exercise > > > dma-buf access via that path.

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3] tests/prime_vgem: Examine blitter access path

2020-02-12 Thread Janusz Krzysztofik
Hi Chris, On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 12:39:36 PM CET Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2020-02-04 11:41:13) > > On future hardware with missing GGTT BAR we won't be able to exercise > > dma-buf access via that path. An alternative to basic-gtt subtest for > > testing dma-buf

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3] tests/prime_vgem: Examine blitter access path

2020-02-11 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2020-02-04 11:41:13) > On future hardware with missing GGTT BAR we won't be able to exercise > dma-buf access via that path. An alternative to basic-gtt subtest for > testing dma-buf access is required, as well as basic-fence-mmap and > coherency-gtt subtest

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3] tests/prime_vgem: Examine blitter access path

2020-02-04 Thread Janusz Krzysztofik
On future hardware with missing GGTT BAR we won't be able to exercise dma-buf access via that path. An alternative to basic-gtt subtest for testing dma-buf access is required, as well as basic-fence-mmap and coherency-gtt subtest alternatives for testing WC coherency. Access to the dma sg list