Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-29 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:05:55PM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: > >@@ -680,8 +680,8 @@ eb_vma_misplaced(struct i915_vma *vma) > > if (entry->flags & __EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_MAP && > > !obj->map_and_fenceable) > > return !only_mappable_for_reloc(entry->flags); > > > >- if

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-29 Thread Michel Thierry
On 7/28/2015 3:43 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:12:11PM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: On 7/27/2015 10:11 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:33:29AM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: + if (!(entry->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_SUPPORTS_48B_ADDRESS) && + (vm

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-28 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:12:11PM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: > On 7/27/2015 10:11 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > >On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:33:29AM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: > >>+ if (!(entry->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_SUPPORTS_48B_ADDRESS) && > >>+ (vma->node.start + vma->node.size) >= (1ULL <

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-28 Thread Michel Thierry
On 7/27/2015 10:11 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:33:29AM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: + if (!(entry->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_SUPPORTS_48B_ADDRESS) && + (vma->node.start + vma->node.size) >= (1ULL << 32)) + return true; gcc completely screwed this

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-27 Thread Chris Wilson
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:33:29AM +0100, Michel Thierry wrote: > + if (!(entry->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_SUPPORTS_48B_ADDRESS) && > + (vma->node.start + vma->node.size) >= (1ULL << 32)) > + return true; gcc completely screwed this up here and used 0 for 1ULL<<32. Note that we

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-27 Thread Michel Thierry
On 7/27/2015 3:46 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 08:04:50PM +0530, Goel, Akash wrote: On 7/16/2015 3:03 PM, Michel Thierry wrote: There are some allocations that must be only referenced by 32-bit offsets. To limit the chances of having the first 4GB already full, objects not

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-27 Thread Chris Wilson
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 08:04:50PM +0530, Goel, Akash wrote: > > > On 7/16/2015 3:03 PM, Michel Thierry wrote: > >There are some allocations that must be only referenced by 32-bit > >offsets. To limit the chances of having the first 4GB already full, > >objects not requiring this workaround use D

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-27 Thread Goel, Akash
On 7/16/2015 3:03 PM, Michel Thierry wrote: There are some allocations that must be only referenced by 32-bit offsets. To limit the chances of having the first 4GB already full, objects not requiring this workaround use DRM_MM_SEARCH_BELOW/ DRM_MM_CREATE_TOP flags In specific, any resource use

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 17/19] drm/i915: Wa32bitGeneralStateOffset & Wa32bitInstructionBaseOffset

2015-07-16 Thread Michel Thierry
There are some allocations that must be only referenced by 32-bit offsets. To limit the chances of having the first 4GB already full, objects not requiring this workaround use DRM_MM_SEARCH_BELOW/ DRM_MM_CREATE_TOP flags In specific, any resource used with flat/heapless (0x-0xf000) Gen