[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230120110833.76cc7864@collabora.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 11:08:33 +0100
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>
Cc: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, corbet@....net,
tzimmermann@...e.de,
"Thomas Hellström (Intel)"
<thomas_os@...pmail.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bskeggs@...hat.com,
jason@...kstrand.net, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
airlied@...hat.com, christian.koenig@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH drm-next 13/14] drm/nouveau: implement new VM_BIND UAPI
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 04:58:48 +0000
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com> wrote:
> > For the ops structures the drm_gpuva_manager allocates for reporting the
> > split/merge steps back to the driver I have ideas to entirely avoid
> > allocations, which also is a good thing in respect of Christians feedback
> > regarding the huge amount of mapping requests some applications seem to
> > generate.
> >
>
> It should be fine to have allocations to report the split/merge step as
> this step should be before a dma-fence is published, but yea if possible
> to avoid extra allocs as that is always better.
>
> Also BTW, great work on drm_gpuva_manager too. We will almost likely
> pick this up in Xe rather than open coding all of this as we currently
> do. We should probably start the port to this soon so we can contribute
> to the implementation and get both of our drivers upstream sooner.
Also quite interested in using this drm_gpuva_manager for pancsf, since
I've been open-coding something similar. Didn't have the
gpuva_region concept to make sure VA mapping/unmapping requests don't
don't go outside a pre-reserved region, but it seems to automate some
of the stuff I've been doing quite nicely.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists