similar to: [PATCH 0/2] Add BO reservation to GEM VRAM pin/unpin/push_to_system

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 06:27:45PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > The new interfaces drm_gem_vram_{pin/unpin}_reserved() are variants of the > GEM VRAM pin/unpin functions that do not reserve the BO during validation. > The mgag200 driver requires this behavior for its cursor handling. The > patch also converts the driver to use the new interfaces. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 06:27:45PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > The new interfaces drm_gem_vram_{pin/unpin}_reserved() are variants of the > GEM VRAM pin/unpin functions that do not reserve the BO during validation. > The mgag200 driver requires this behavior for its cursor handling. The > patch also converts the driver to use the new interfaces. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas

Am 20.05.19 um 18:26 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > [CAUTION: External Email] > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 06:19:00PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 06:27:45PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: >>> The new interfaces drm_gem_vram_{pin/unpin}_reserved() are variants of the >>> GEM VRAM pin/unpin functions that do not reserve the BO during validation.

Several simple framebuffer drivers copy most of the TTM code from each other. The implementation is always the same; except for the name of some data structures. As recently discussed, this patch set provides generic memory-management code for simple framebuffers with dedicated video memory. It further converts the respective drivers to the generic code. The shared code is basically the same

Several simple framebuffer drivers copy most of the TTM code from each other. The implementation is always the same; except for the name of some data structures. As recently discussed, this patch set provides generic memory-management code for simple framebuffers with dedicated video memory. It further converts the respective drivers to the generic code. The shared code is basically the same

Several simple framebuffer drivers copy most of the TTM code from each other. The implementation is always the same; except for the name of some data structures. As recently discussed, this patch set provides generic memory-management code for simple framebuffers with dedicated video memory. It further converts the respective drivers to the generic code. The shared code is basically the same

Several simple framebuffer drivers copy most of the TTM code from each other. The implementation is always the same; except for the name of some data structures. As recently discussed, this patch set provides generic memory-management code for simple framebuffers with dedicated video memory. It further converts the respective drivers to the generic code. The shared code is basically the same

Several simple framebuffer drivers copy most of the TTM code from each other. The implementation is always the same; except for the name of some data structures. As recently discussed, this patch set provides generic memory-management code for simple framebuffers with dedicated video memory. It further converts the respective drivers to the generic code. The shared code is basically the same

Several simple framebuffer drivers copy most of the TTM code from each other. The implementation is always the same; except for the name of some data structures. As recently discussed, this patch set provides generic memory-management code for simple framebuffers with dedicated video memory. It further converts the respective drivers to the generic code. The shared code is basically the same

Hi Thomas. Some minor things and some bikeshedding too. One general^Wbikeshedding thing - unint32_t is used in many places. And then s64 in one place. Seems like two concepts are mixed. Maybe be consistent and use u32, s32 everywhere? I did not read the code carefully enough to understand it. I cannot give a r-b or a-b - as I feel I need to understand it to do so. Sam On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at

Hi Thomas. Some minor things and some bikeshedding too. One general^Wbikeshedding thing - unint32_t is used in many places. And then s64 in one place. Seems like two concepts are mixed. Maybe be consistent and use u32, s32 everywhere? I did not read the code carefully enough to understand it. I cannot give a r-b or a-b - as I feel I need to understand it to do so. Sam On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at

The new interfaces drm_gem_vram_{pin/unpin}_reserved() are variants of the GEM VRAM pin/unpin functions that do not reserve the BO during validation. The mgag200 driver requires this behavior for its cursor handling. The patch also converts the driver to use the new interfaces. Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c | 75

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 06:19:00PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 06:27:45PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > > The new interfaces drm_gem_vram_{pin/unpin}_reserved() are variants of the > > GEM VRAM pin/unpin functions that do not reserve the BO during validation. > > The mgag200 driver requires this behavior for its cursor handling. The > >

DRM client buffers are permanently mapped throughout their lifetime. This prevents us from using generic framebuffer emulation for devices with small dedicated video memory, such as ast or mgag200. With fb buffers permanently mapped, such devices often won't have enougth space left to display other content (e.g., X11). This patch set introduces unmappable DRM client buffers for framebuffer

DRM client buffers are permanently mapped throughout their lifetime. This prevents us from using generic framebuffer emulation for devices with small dedicated video memory, such as ast or mgag200. With fb buffers permanently mapped, such devices often won't have enougth space left to display other content (e.g., X11). This patch set introduces unmappable DRM client buffers for framebuffer

DRM client buffers are permanently mapped throughout their lifetime. This prevents us from using generic framebuffer emulation for devices with small dedicated video memory, such as ast or mgag200. With fb buffers permanently mapped, such devices often won't have enough space left to display other content (e.g., X11). This patch set introduces unmappable DRM client buffers for framebuffer

DRM client buffers are permanently mapped throughout their lifetime. This prevents us from using generic framebuffer emulation for devices with small dedicated video memory, such as ast or mgag200. With fb buffers permanently mapped, such devices often won't have enough space left to display other content (e.g., X11). This patch set introduces unmappable DRM client buffers for framebuffer

> +/** > + * drm_gem_vram_unpin() - Unpins a GEM VRAM object > + * @gbo: the GEM VRAM object > + * > + * Returns: > + * 0 on success, or > + * a negative error code otherwise. > + */ > +int drm_gem_vram_unpin(struct drm_gem_vram_object *gbo) > +{ > + int i, ret; > + struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx = { false, false }; > + > + if (!gbo->pin_count) > +

> +/** > + * drm_gem_vram_unpin() - Unpins a GEM VRAM object > + * @gbo: the GEM VRAM object > + * > + * Returns: > + * 0 on success, or > + * a negative error code otherwise. > + */ > +int drm_gem_vram_unpin(struct drm_gem_vram_object *gbo) > +{ > + int i, ret; > + struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx = { false, false }; > + > + if (!gbo->pin_count) > +

DRM's fbdev console uses regular load and store operations to update framebuffer memory. The bochs driver on sparc64 requires the use of I/O-specific load and store operations. We have a workaround, but need a long-term solution to the problem. This patchset changes GEM's vmap/vunmap interfaces to forward pointers of type struct dma_buf_map and updates the generic fbdev emulation to use