search for: num_tag

...2015 at 2:21 AM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou at gmail.com> wrote: > @@ -150,7 +151,10 @@ gf100_ltc_init_tag_ram(struct nvkm_fb *pfb, struct nvkm_ltc_priv *priv) > int ret; > > /* tags for 1/4 of VRAM should be enough (8192/4 per GiB of VRAM) */ > - priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; > + if (pfb->ram) > + priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; > + else > + priv->num_tags = (1 << 17); > if (priv->num_tags > (1 << 17)) >...

...uveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c index bcca883..7288940 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c @@ -30,8 +30,9 @@ struct nvc0_ltcg_priv { struct nouveau_ltcg base; u32 part_nr; u32 subp_nr; - struct nouveau_mm tags; u32 num_tags; + u32 tag_base; + struct nouveau_mm tags; struct nouveau_mm_node *tag_ram; }; @@ -117,10 +118,6 @@ nvc0_ltcg_init_tag_ram(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, struct nvc0_ltcg_priv *priv) u32 tag_size, tag_margin, tag_align; int ret; - nv_wr32(priv, 0x17e8d8, priv->part_nr); - if (nv_device(pfb)...

...uveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c index bcca883..7288940 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c @@ -30,8 +30,9 @@ struct nvc0_ltcg_priv { struct nouveau_ltcg base; u32 part_nr; u32 subp_nr; - struct nouveau_mm tags; u32 num_tags; + u32 tag_base; + struct nouveau_mm tags; struct nouveau_mm_node *tag_ram; }; @@ -117,10 +118,6 @@ nvc0_ltcg_init_tag_ram(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, struct nvc0_ltcg_priv *priv) u32 tag_size, tag_margin, tag_align; int ret; - nv_wr32(priv, 0x17e8d8, priv->part_nr); - if (nv_device(pfb)...

...); + if (pfb->ram) + nvkm_mm_free(&pfb->vram, &priv->tag_ram); nvkm_ltc_destroy(priv); } @@ -150,7 +151,10 @@ gf100_ltc_init_tag_ram(struct nvkm_fb *pfb, struct nvkm_ltc_priv *priv) int ret; /* tags for 1/4 of VRAM should be enough (8192/4 per GiB of VRAM) */ - priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; + if (pfb->ram) + priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; + else + priv->num_tags = (1 << 17); if (priv->num_tags > (1 << 17)) priv->num_tags = 1 << 17; /* we have 17 bits in PTE */ priv->num...

...); + if (pfb->ram) + nvkm_mm_free(&pfb->vram, &priv->tag_ram); nvkm_ltc_destroy(priv); } @@ -150,7 +151,10 @@ gf100_ltc_init_tag_ram(struct nvkm_fb *pfb, struct nvkm_ltc_priv *priv) int ret; /* tags for 1/4 of VRAM should be enough (8192/4 per GiB of VRAM) */ - priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; + if (pfb->ram) + priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; + else + priv->num_tags = (1 << 17); if (priv->num_tags > (1 << 17)) priv->num_tags = 1 << 17; /* we have 17 bits in PTE */ priv->num...

...eau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c index 01da47bda..61e9a9b 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c @@ -30,8 +30,9 @@ struct nvc0_ltcg_priv { struct nouveau_ltcg base; u32 part_nr; u32 subp_nr; - struct nouveau_mm tags; u32 num_tags; + u32 tag_base; + struct nouveau_mm tags; struct nouveau_mm_node *tag_ram; }; @@ -117,10 +118,6 @@ nvc0_ltcg_init_tag_ram(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, struct nvc0_ltcg_priv *priv) u32 tag_size, tag_margin, tag_align; int ret; - nv_wr32(priv, 0x17e8d8, priv->part_nr); - if (nv_device(pfb)...

.../drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c > @@ -30,8 +30,9 @@ struct nvc0_ltcg_priv { > struct nouveau_ltcg base; > u32 part_nr; > u32 subp_nr; > - struct nouveau_mm tags; > u32 num_tags; > + u32 tag_base; > + struct nouveau_mm tags; > struct nouveau_mm_node *tag_ram; > }; > > @@ -117,10 +118,6 @@ nvc0_ltcg_init_tag_ram(struct nouveau_fb *pfb, struct nvc0_ltcg_priv *priv) > u32 tag_size, tag_margin, tag_align; > int ret;...

...ers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/ltcg/nvc0.c @@ -23,10 +23,17 @@ */ #include <subdev/ltcg.h> +#include <subdev/fb.h> +#include <subdev/timer.h> struct nvc0_ltcg_priv { struct nouveau_ltcg base; + u32 part_nr; + u32 part_mask; u32 subp_nr; + struct nouveau_mm tags; + u32 num_tags; + struct nouveau_mm_node *tag_ram; }; static void @@ -62,11 +69,104 @@ nvc0_ltcg_intr(struct nouveau_subdev *subdev) } static int +nvc0_ltcg_tags_alloc(struct nouveau_ltcg *ltcg, u32 n, + struct nouveau_mm_node **pnode) +{ + struct nvc0_ltcg_priv *priv = (struct nvc0_ltcg_priv *)ltc...

Changes since v1: - Add missing else condition in ltc - Remove extra flags that slipped into nouveau_display.c and nv84_fence.c. Original cover letter: Patches 1-3 make the presence of a RAM device optional, and remove GK20A's dummy RAM driver we were using so far. On chips using shared memory, such a device can confuse the driver into moving objects where there is no need to, and can trick

...nvkm_mm_free(&pfb->vram, &priv->tag_ram); nvkm_ltc_destroy(priv); } @@ -149,6 +150,12 @@ gf100_ltc_init_tag_ram(struct nvkm_fb *pfb, struct nvkm_ltc_priv *priv) u32 tag_size, tag_margin, tag_align; int ret; + /* No VRAM, no tags for now. */ + if (!pfb->ram) { + priv->num_tags = 0; + goto mm_init; + } + /* tags for 1/4 of VRAM should be enough (8192/4 per GiB of VRAM) */ priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; if (priv->num_tags > (1 << 17)) @@ -183,6 +190,7 @@ gf100_ltc_init_tag_ram(struct nvkm_fb *pfb, struct nvkm_ltc_priv *priv)...

...y(priv); > } > @@ -149,6 +150,12 @@ gf100_ltc_init_tag_ram(struct nvkm_fb *pfb, struct nvkm_ltc_priv *priv) > u32 tag_size, tag_margin, tag_align; > int ret; > > + /* No VRAM, no tags for now. */ > + if (!pfb->ram) { > + priv->num_tags = 0; > + goto mm_init; > + } > + > /* tags for 1/4 of VRAM should be enough (8192/4 per GiB of VRAM) */ > priv->num_tags = (pfb->ram->size >> 17) / 4; > if (priv->num_tags > (1 << 17)) > @@ -183,6 +190,7 @@...

...tags iteration {0, -1}, sub -1, 0 tags, greedy catenation, sub 2, 0 tags literal (%, %) (37, 37), pos 1, sub -1, 0 tags @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ Union Literal 0-36 After union left - Literal 38-65535 + Literal 38--1 After union right After union right num_tags += 2 @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ assertions: bol union, sub -1, 0 tags literal (, $) (0, 36), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags - literal (&, M-^?) (38, 65535), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags + literal (&, M-^?) (38, -1), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags iteration {...

A series I have waited too long to submit, and the recent refactoring made me pay the price of my perfectionism, so here are the features that are at least completed Patches 1-3 make the presence of a RAM device optional, and remove GK20A's dummy RAM driver we were using so far. On chips using shared memory, such a device can confuse the driver into moving objects where there is no need to,

Thanks Ilia for the v2 review! Here is the v3 of this IOMMU support for GK20A series. Changes since v2: - Cleaner changes for ltc - Fixed typos in gk20a instmem IOMMU comments Changes since v1: - Add missing else condition in ltc - Remove extra flags that slipped into nouveau_display.c and nv84_fence.c. Original cover letter: Patches 1-3 make the presence of a RAM device optional, and remove

...tag_size += tag_align; tag_size = (tag_size + 0xfff) >> 12; /* round up */ - ret = nouveau_mm_tail(&pfb->vram, 0, tag_size, tag_size, 1, + ret = nouveau_mm_tail(&pfb->vram, 1, tag_size, tag_size, 1, &priv->tag_ram); if (ret) { priv->num_tags = 0;

...f (pfb->ram) > + ret = nvkm_mm_tail(&pfb->vram, 1, 1, tag_size, tag_size, 1, > + &priv->tag_ram); > + ret = -1; Was there supposed to be an else somewhere in there? > if (ret) { > priv->num_tags = 0; > } else { > -- > 2.2.2 > > _______________________________________________ > Nouveau mailing list > Nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau

...tenation, sub 2, 0 tags >> literal (%, %) (37, 37), pos 1, sub -1, 0 tags >> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ >> Union >> Literal 0-36 >> After union left >> - Literal 38-65535 >> + Literal 38--1 >> After union right >> After union right >> num_tags += 2 >> @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ >> assertions: bol >> union, sub -1, 0 tags >> literal (, $) (0, 36), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags >> - literal (&, M-^?) (38, 65535), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags >> + literal (&, M-^?) (38, -1...

Changes since v3: - Use a single dma_attr for all DMA-API allocations in instmem instead of one per allocation - Use device.info.ram_size instead of pfb->ram to check whether VRAM is present outside of nvkm Changes since v2: - Cleaner changes for ltc - Fixed typos in gk20a instmem IOMMU comments Changes since v1: - Add missing else condition in ltc - Remove extra flags that slipped into

...1, sub -1, 0 tags >>>> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ >>>> Union >>>> Literal 0-36 >>>> After union left >>>> - Literal 38-65535 >>>> + Literal 38--1 >>>> After union right >>>> After union right >>>> num_tags += 2 >>>> @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ >>>> assertions: bol >>>> union, sub -1, 0 tags >>>> literal (, $) (0, 36), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags >>>> - literal (&, M-^?) (38, 65535), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags >>&g...

..., 0 tags, greedy > catenation, sub 2, 0 tags > literal (%, %) (37, 37), pos 1, sub -1, 0 tags > @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ > Union > Literal 0-36 > After union left > - Literal 38-65535 > + Literal 38--1 > After union right > After union right > num_tags += 2 > @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ > assertions: bol > union, sub -1, 0 tags > literal (, $) (0, 36), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags > - literal (&, M-^?) (38, 65535), pos 0, sub -1, 0 tags > + literal (&, M-^?) (38, -1), pos 0, sub -1, 0 t...