[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180425064118.GA28100@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 23:41:18 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
<linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
"open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 4/8] dma-buf: add peer2peer flag
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 02:24:36AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > It has a non-coherent transaction mode (which the chipset can opt to
> > not implement and still flush), to make sure the AGP horror show
> > doesn't happen again and GPU folks are happy with PCIe. That's at
> > least my understanding from digging around in amd the last time we had
> > coherency issues between intel and amd gpus. GPUs have some bits
> > somewhere (in the pagetables, or in the buffer object description
> > table created by userspace) to control that stuff.
>
> Right. We have a bit in the GPU page table entries that determines
> whether we snoop the CPU's cache or not.
I can see how that works with the GPU on the same SOC or SOC set as the
CPU. But how is that going to work for a GPU that is a plain old PCIe
card? The cache snooping in that case is happening in the PCIe root
complex.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists