[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1676c507-37b4-6bfa-8158-2e373db7e7cc@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 11:45:17 +0000
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>,
Intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] Compact userptr object backing store
allocation
Hi Andrew,
On 11/11/2016 08:50, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>
>
> Userptr backing store with SWIOTBL active is currently allocated in the same
> inefficient manner, with one sg entry per object page, as what the commit
> 871dfbd67d4e ("drm/i915: Allow compaction upto SWIOTLB max segment size") fixed
> for regular GEM objects.
>
> We can fix that by adding new a __sg_alloc_table_from_pages core function which
> allows us to control the maximum desired coalesced segment size.
>
> Other than that the series starts with two simple fixes to
> sg_alloc_table_from_pages which deal with incorrect data type usage and a
> theoretical overflow condition. Fixing the latter enables easy addition of the
> above mentioned __sg_alloc_table_from_pages.
>
> Tvrtko Ursulin (4):
> lib/scatterlist: Fix offset type in sg_alloc_table_from_pages
> lib/scatterlist: Avoid potential scatterlist entry overflow
> lib/scatterlist: Introduce and export __sg_alloc_table_from_pages
> drm/i915: Use __sg_alloc_table_from_pages for userptr allocations
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 9 +++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 15 +----
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 28 ++-------
> drivers/media/v4l2-core/videobuf2-dma-contig.c | 4 +-
> drivers/rapidio/devices/rio_mport_cdev.c | 4 +-
> include/linux/scatterlist.h | 11 ++--
> lib/scatterlist.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++------
> 7 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
I have three patches to lib/scatterlist.c in this series which has all
been reviewed and tested.
We would like to merge them via the DRM tree if there are no objections?
Kind regards,
Tvrtko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists