Hi,
On 11-03-19 17:51, Christian K?nig wrote:> Am 11.03.19 um 17:39 schrieb Hans de Goede:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 07-02-19 09:59, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>> Almost all TTM-based drivers use the same values for the mmap-able
>>> range of BO addresses. Each driver therefore duplicates the
>>> DRM_FILE_PAGE_OFFSET constant. OTOH, the mmap range's size is
not
>>> configurable by drivers.
>>>
>>> This patch set replaces driver-specific configuration with a single
>>> setup. All code is located within TTM. TTM and GEM share the same
>>> range for mmap-able BOs.
>>>
>>> Thomas Zimmermann (5):
>>> ?? staging/vboxvideo: Use same BO mmap offset as other drivers
>>> ?? drm/ttm: Define a single DRM_FILE_PAGE_OFFSET constant
>>> ?? drm/ttm: Remove file_page_offset parameter from
ttm_bo_device_init()
>>> ?? drm/ttm: Quick-test mmap offset in ttm_bo_mmap()
>>> ?? drm: Use the same mmap-range offset and size for GEM and TTM
>>
>> Note I'm about to push a patch-series to drm-misc-next which moves
>> vboxvideo out of staging and I see that this series has not landed
>> in drm-misc-next yet, so it will needs to be rebased.
>
> Mhm, TTM is usually not pushed upstream through drm-misc-next, so that will
certainly collide with the next TTM pull request.
Ugh, I didn't realize that this series would not be going through
drm-misc-next.
> So can you wait with that or should I make an exception and merge this
change though drm-misc-next?
I've already pushed it now :| My mail was more intended as a headsup then
that I expected an objection, sorry.
I see 2 possible solutions:
1) Merge drm-misc-next into the ttm tree (probably the cleanest)
2) Push your series through drm-misc-next
Regards,
Hans
