On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 04:51:36PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 11:19:43AM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 06:32:52PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33:27AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Nov 22
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 11:19:43AM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 06:32:52PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33:27AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Nov
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 06:32:52PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33:27AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
[...]
> > +static int
>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 06:45:14PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:32:58AM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> And putting the cpu PFN of a ZONE_DEVICE device page into
> sg_dma_address still looks very wrong to me
The below call in patch 7 does convert any cpu PFN
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 08:32:58AM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> > And putting the cpu PFN of a ZONE_DEVICE device page into
> > sg_dma_address still looks very wrong to me
>
> The below call in patch 7 does convert any cpu PFN to device address.
> So, it won't be CPU PFN.
> i915_dmem_c
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33:27AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > +static int
> > > +i915_range_fault(struct i915_svm *svm, struct hmm_r
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33:27AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
[...]
> +static int
> +i915_range_fault(struct i915_svm *svm, struct hmm_range *range)
>
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 01:24:18PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 01:12:47PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> > > Using a temporary range is the pattern from nouveau, is it really
> > > necessary in this driver?
> >
> > Yah, not required. In my local build I tried
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 01:24:18PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 01:12:47PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
>
> > > > > Using a temporary range is the pattern from nouveau, is it really
> > > > > necessary in this driver?
> > > >
> > > > Yah, not required. In my l
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
[...]
> > +static int
> > +i915_range_fault(struct i915_svm *svm, struct hmm_range *range)
> > +{
> > + long ret;
> > +
> > + range->default_flags = 0;
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 01:12:47PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> > > > Using a temporary range is the pattern from nouveau, is it really
> > > > necessary in this driver?
> > >
> > > Yah, not required. In my local build I tried with proper default_flags
> > > and set pfn_flags_mask to
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 11:53:52PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 08:44:18PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
>
> > +static i
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 08:44:18PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
> >
> > > +static inline bool
> > > +i915_range_done(struct hmm_range *range)
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:33:12PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
+static inline bool
+i915_range_done(struct hmm_range *range)
+{
+ bool ret = hmm_range_valid(range);
+
+ hmm_range_unregister(range);
+
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:57:27PM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
> +static inline bool
> +i915_range_done(struct hmm_range *range)
> +{
> + bool ret = hmm_range_valid(range);
> +
> + hmm_range_unregister(range);
> + return ret;
> +}
This needs to be updated to follow the new
Use HMM page table mirroring support to build device page table.
Implement the bind ioctl and bind the process address range in the
specified context's ppgtt.
Handle invalidation notifications by unbinding the address range.
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen
Cc: Jon Bloomfield
Cc: Daniel Vetter
Cc: Sudeep Du
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 08:14:51PM +, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:01:17PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:54:45AM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
> Use HMM page table mirroring support to build device page table.
> Implement the
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:01:17PM -0800, Niranjan Vishwanathapura wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:54:45AM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
> > Use HMM page table mirroring support to build device page table.
> > Implement the bind ioctl and bind the process address range in the
> > spec
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:54:45AM -0800, Niranjana Vishwanathapura wrote:
Use HMM page table mirroring support to build device page table.
Implement the bind ioctl and bind the process address range in the
specified context's ppgtt.
Handle invalidation notifications by unbinding the address rang
19 matches
Mail list logo
