similar to: Is Nouveau really using the io_reserve_lru?

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 at 22:19, Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi guys, > > while working through more old TTM functionality I stumbled over the > io_reserve_lru. > > Basic idea is that when this flag is set the driver->io_mem_reserve() > callback can return -EAGAIN resulting in unmapping of other BOs. > > But Nouveau

Hi guys, while working through more old TTM functionality I stumbled over the io_reserve_lru. Basic idea is that when this flag is set the driver->io_mem_reserve() callback can return -EAGAIN resulting in unmapping of other BOs. But Nouveau doesn't seem to return -EAGAIN in the call path of io_mem_reserve anywhere. So is this unused or am I missing something? Regards, Christian.

From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> That is not used any more. v2: keep the NULL checks in TTM. Signed-off-by: Christian K?nig <christian.koenig at amd.com> Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> --- drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 34 +-------- drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_util.c | 113 +++--------------------------

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 at 00:30, Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> > > While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by > Nouveau is actually not working at all. > > In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory > management,

From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by Nouveau is actually not working at all. In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau instead. The patch should be functional correct, but is only compile

Without diving in any of the details, your commit message has me curious and concerned... In a "manager" kind of way, despite being neither a manager nor an insider or active contributor. ;-) On 24/01/2020 14:30, Christian K?nig wrote: > From: Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> > > While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru

Just a gentle ping on this. Already got the Acked-by from Daniel, but I need some of the nouveau guys to test this since I can only compile test it. Regards, Christian.

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 03:12:53PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by > Nouveau is actually not working at all. > > In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory > management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau > instead. > > The patch should be

While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by Nouveau is actually not working at all. In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau instead. The patch should be functional correct, but is only compile tested! Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at

Am 09.10.19 um 17:39 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 03:12:53PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > [SNIP] >> +static vm_fault_t nouveau_ttm_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf) >> +{ >> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma; >> + struct ttm_buffer_object *bo = vma->vm_private_data; >> + pgprot_t prot; >> + vm_fault_t ret; >> + >> +

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > Am 19.12.2017 um 11:39 schrieb Michel Dänzer: >> >> On 2017-12-19 11:37 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: >>> >>> On 2017-12-18 08:01 PM, Tobias Klausmann wrote: >>>> >>>> On 12/18/17 7:06 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>>>>

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault at gmx.de> wrote: > On Sun, 2017-12-31 at 13:27 -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Christian König >> <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: >> > Am 19.12.2017 um 11:39 schrieb Michel Dänzer: >> >> >> >> On 2017-12-19 11:37 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote:

On Sun, 2017-12-31 at 13:27 -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Christian König > <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > > Am 19.12.2017 um 11:39 schrieb Michel Dänzer: > >> > >> On 2017-12-19 11:37 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: > >>> > >>> On 2017-12-18 08:01 PM, Tobias Klausmann wrote: > >>>>

While working on TTM cleanups I've found that the io_reserve_lru used by Nouveau is actually not working at all. In general we should remove driver specific handling from the memory management, so this patch moves the io_reserve_lru handling into Nouveau instead. v2: don't call ttm_bo_unmap_virtual in nouveau_ttm_io_mem_reserve v3: rebased and use both base and offset in the check v4:

Hi guys, I've already send this out in September last year, but only got a response from Daniel. Could you guys please test this and tell me what you think about it? Basically I'm trying to remove all driver specific features from TTM which don't need to be inside the framework. Thanks, Christian.

Implementing those is completely unecessary. Signed-off-by: Christian K?nig <christian.koenig at amd.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c | 5 ----- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c | 5 ----- drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c | 6 ------ drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c | 5 ----- drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer.c | 11 -----------

Hello Christian K?nig, The patch 141b15e59175: "drm/nouveau: move io_reserve_lru handling into the driver v5" from Aug 21, 2020, leads to the following static checker warning: drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:148 nouveau_ttm_fault() warn: inconsistent returns '*bo->base.resv'. drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c 126 static vm_fault_t nouveau_ttm_fault(struct

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:16 AM Michel D?nzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote: > > On 2020-05-11 10:12 p.m., Alex Deucher wrote: > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 1:17 PM Christian K?nig > > <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> AGP is deprecated for 10+ years now and not used any more on modern hardware. > >> > >> Old

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:43 AM Christian K?nig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote: > > Am 13.05.20 um 13:03 schrieb Christian K?nig: > > Unfortunately AGP is still to widely used as we could just drop support for using its GART. > > > > Not using the AGP GART also doesn't mean a loss in functionality since drivers will just fallback to the driver

Hi guys, so I got some hardware and tested this and after hammering out tons of typos it now seems to work fine. Could you give it more testing? Thanks in advance, Christian