similar to: [RFC] Rewrite page fault interception in TTM drivers

Not sure what this hook is supposed to do. vmf->vma->vm_private_data should never be NULL, so the extra check in qxl_ttm_fault should have no effect. Drop it. Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c | 27 +-------------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c

Not sure what this hook is supposed to do. vmf->vma->vm_private_data should never be NULL, so the extra check in qxl_ttm_fault should have no effect. Drop it. Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c | 27 +-------------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_ttm.c

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

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:

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

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

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,

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

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79912 Priority: medium Bug ID: 79912 Assignee: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org Summary: Nouveau unuseable with 3 monitors and a geforce GTX 670 QA Contact: xorg-team at lists.x.org Severity: major Classification: Unclassified OS: Linux (All)

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.

On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:41:27PM +0200, Peter Wu wrote: > Currently unloading bochs_drm (after unbinding the vtconsole) results in > a warning about a leaked connector: > > [drm:drm_mode_config_cleanup] *ERROR* connector Virtual-3 leaked! > > While investigating a potential fix I noticed that a lot of open-coded > functionality is already implemented elsewhere, so

Am 22.01.24 um 04:32 schrieb Xianrong Zhou: > The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults > on a device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does > not make the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only > or dirty catching. What? How do you got to this conclusion? > The first fault only sets up the pte entry which actually is > dirty

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 05:07:18PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > From: Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> > > This patch adds a kms driver for the virtio gpu. The xorg modesetting > driver can handle the device just fine, the framebuffer for fbcon is > there too. > > Qemu patches for the host side are under review currently. > > The pci version of the device

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 05:07:18PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > From: Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> > > This patch adds a kms driver for the virtio gpu. The xorg modesetting > driver can handle the device just fine, the framebuffer for fbcon is > there too. > > Qemu patches for the host side are under review currently. > > The pci version of the device

Am 23.01.24 um 09:33 schrieb Zhou, Xianrong: > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > >>> The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults on a >>> device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does not make >>> the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only or dirty >>> catching. >> What? How do you got to this conclusion?

Am 24.01.24 um 03:43 schrieb Zhou, Xianrong: > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > >>>>> The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults on a >>>>> device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does not make >>>>> the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only or dirty >>>>> catching. >>>>

Hi guys, I already tried this a few month ago, but since I don't have NVidia hardware its rather hard to test for me (need to get some ordered). Dave brought up the topic that we should probably try to move the handling into Nouveau once more, so I tried to fix the problem Ben reported and rebased on top of current drm-misc-next. Dave can you test this? At least in theory the approach

From: Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> This patch adds a kms driver for the virtio gpu. The xorg modesetting driver can handle the device just fine, the framebuffer for fbcon is there too. Qemu patches for the host side are under review currently. The pci version of the device comes in two variants: with and without vga compatibility. The former has a extra memory bar for the vga

From: Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> This patch adds a kms driver for the virtio gpu. The xorg modesetting driver can handle the device just fine, the framebuffer for fbcon is there too. Qemu patches for the host side are under review currently. The pci version of the device comes in two variants: with and without vga compatibility. The former has a extra memory bar for the vga

"Zhou, Xianrong" <Xianrong.Zhou at amd.com> writes: > [AMD Official Use Only - General] > >> >>>>> The vmf_insert_pfn_prot could cause unnecessary double faults on a >> >>>>> device pfn. Because currently the vmf_insert_pfn_prot does not >> >>>>> make the pfn writable so the pte entry is normally read-only or