search for: nouveau_vm_map_sg_t

...ap_sg() which was trying to handle the case at that low level, but this isn't enough, and after a bit of digging, I also think that's not the right approach: So, from what I can tell, subdev/vm/base.c is not clean vs. PAGE_SIZE in a number of places unless I'm mistaken. For example, in nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(), something like that: sglen = sg_dma_len(sg) >> PAGE_SHIFT; end = pte + sglen; Seems to imply an assumption here that the "pte" is in multiple of PAGE_SHIFT, but afaik, it's not. So further down, we do: for (m = 0; m < len; m++) { dma_addr_t addr = sg_dma_a...

...here, as you >> can see in the bug. >> >> Ben/Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, >> since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) > Not it really isn't appropriate.. > > You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly > is where it's not expected to be called. > > Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c > --...

...(1ULL << NVDEV_ENGINE_GR) | diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c index ef3133e..5833851 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c @@ -84,10 +84,11 @@ nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(struct nouveau_vma *vma, u64 delta, u64 length, { struct nouveau_vm *vm = vma->vm; struct nouveau_vmmgr *vmm = vm->vmm; - int big = vma->node->type != vmm->spg_shift; + u32 shift = vma->node->type; + int big = shift != vmm->spg_shift; u32 offset = vma->node-&gt...

...h mapping a piece of card > address space in the card VM and thus shouldn't be concerned by the > system PAGE_SIZE at all, right ? Former, but the code entangles system PAGE_SIZE and card PAGE_SIZE/SHIFT/MASK in some cases. > IE. The only one we should actually care about here is > nouveau_vm_map_sg_table() or am I missing an important piece of the > puzzle ? nouveau_vm_map_sg too. nouveau_vm_map is special, and also used to map VRAM into BAR1/BAR3 by subdev/bar code. > Additionally, nv41.c has only map_sg() callbacks, no map() callbacks, > should I assume that means that nouveau_vm_ma...

...size change? > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c > index ef3133e..5833851 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c > @@ -84,10 +84,11 @@ nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(struct nouveau_vma *vma, u64 delta, u64 length, > { > struct nouveau_vm *vm = vma->vm; > struct nouveau_vmmgr *vmm = vm->vmm; > - int big = vma->node->type != vmm->spg_shift; > + u32 shift = vma->node->type; > + int big = shift != vmm->spg_shift; &...

..._type == TTM_PL_VRAM) > nouveau_vm_map(vma, nvbo->bo.mem.mm_node); > - else if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_TT) { > + else if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_TT && > + nvbo->page_shift == vma->vm->vmm->spg_shift) { > if (node->sg) > nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(vma, 0, size, node); > else >

...iff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c > > index ef3133e..5833851 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c > > @@ -84,10 +84,11 @@ nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(struct nouveau_vma *vma, u64 delta, u64 length, > > { > > struct nouveau_vm *vm = vma->vm; > > struct nouveau_vmmgr *vmm = vm->vmm; > > - int big = vma->node->type != vmm->spg_shift; > > + u32 shift = vma->node->type; > > + int big =...

...ers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c >> > index ef3133e..5833851 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c >> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/vm/base.c >> > @@ -84,10 +84,11 @@ nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(struct nouveau_vma *vma, u64 delta, u64 length, >> > { >> > struct nouveau_vm *vm = vma->vm; >> > struct nouveau_vmmgr *vmm = vm->vmm; >> > - int big = vma->node->type != vmm->spg_shift; >> > + u32 shift = vma->node-&gt...

...an see in the bug. >>> >>> Ben/Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, >>> since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) >> Not it really isn't appropriate.. >> >> You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly >> is where it's not expected to be called. >> >> Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouve...

..., as you > > can see in the bug. > > > > Ben/Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, > > since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) > Not it really isn't appropriate.. > > You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly > is where it's not expected to be called. > > Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... > Maarten: I've been testing this stuff with Linux 3.10.x, so I had to modify the patch a bit to make it a...

...ystem address space... I assume the former right ? So a function like nouveau_vm_map_at() is solely concerned with mapping a piece of card address space in the card VM and thus shouldn't be concerned by the system PAGE_SIZE at all, right ? IE. The only one we should actually care about here is nouveau_vm_map_sg_table() or am I missing an important piece of the puzzle ? Additionally, nv41.c has only map_sg() callbacks, no map() callbacks, should I assume that means that nouveau_vm_map() and nouveau_vm_map_at() will never be called on these ? - In vm/base.c this construct appears regulary: struct nouv...

...t;> > >>> Ben/Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, > >>> since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) > >> Not it really isn't appropriate.. > >> > >> You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly > >> is where it's not expected to be called. > >> > >> Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c b/driv...

...gt;>> >>>> Ben/Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, >>>> since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) >>> Not it really isn't appropriate.. >>> >>> You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly >>> is where it's not expected to be called. >>> >>> Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... >>> >> Maarten: I've been testing this stuff with Linux 3.10.x, so I had...

...>mem_type == TTM_PL_TT && - nvbo->page_shift == vma->vm->vmm->spg_shift) { + } else if (new_mem->mem_type == TTM_PL_TT && + nvbo->page_shift == vma->vm->vmm->spg_shift) { if (((struct nouveau_mem *)new_mem->mm_node)->sg) nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(vma, 0, new_mem-> num_pages << PAGE_SHIFT, @@ -1153,8 +1163,6 @@ nouveau_bo_move_ntfy(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, struct ttm_mem_reg *new_mem) nouveau_vm_map_sg(vma, 0, new_mem-> num_pages << PAGE_SHIFT, new_mem->mm_node); - } else { - n...

...o.mem.mm_node); > else if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_TT) { > + if (!(nvbo->valid_caching & TTM_PL_FLAG_CACHED)) > + vma->access |= NV_MEM_ACCESS_NOSNOOP; > + > if (node->sg) > nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(vma, 0, size, node); > else > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h > index 653dbbb..2ecf8b7 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ st...

The code expects non-VRAM mem nodes to have a pages list. If that's not set, it will do a null deref down the line. Warn on that condition and return an error. See https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64774 Reported-by: Pasi K?rkk?inen <pasik at iki.fi> Tested-by: Pasi K?rkk?inen <pasik at iki.fi> Signed-off-by: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> Cc: <stable

.../Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, >>>>>> since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) >>>>> Not it really isn't appropriate.. >>>>> >>>>> You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly >>>>> is where it's not expected to be called. >>>>> >>>>> Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... >>>>> >>>> Maarten: I've been testing...

...ut it definitely was happening here, as you > can see in the bug. > > Ben/Maarten, I'll let you judge whether this check is appropriate, > since like I hope I was able to convey above, I'm just not really sure :) Not it really isn't appropriate.. You'd have to call call nouveau_vm_map_sg_table instead, the only place that doesn't handle that correctly is where it's not expected to be called. Here, have a completely untested patch to fix things... diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/...

...truct nouveau_vm *vm, if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_VRAM) nouveau_vm_map(vma, nvbo->bo.mem.mm_node); else if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_TT) { + if (!(nvbo->valid_caching & TTM_PL_FLAG_CACHED)) + vma->access |= NV_MEM_ACCESS_NOSNOOP; + if (node->sg) nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(vma, 0, size, node); else diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h index 653dbbb..2ecf8b7 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.h @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ struct nouveau_bo { struct ttm_buffer_objec...

...m, if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_VRAM) nouveau_vm_map(vma, nvbo->bo.mem.mm_node); - else if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_TT) { + else if (nvbo->bo.mem.mem_type == TTM_PL_TT && + nvbo->page_shift == vma->vm->vmm->spg_shift) { if (node->sg) nouveau_vm_map_sg_table(vma, 0, size, node); else