On 02.02.2017 11:26, Christian König wrote:
Am 30.01.2017 um 15:43 schrieb Nicolai Hähnle:
On 30.01.2017 13:57, Christian König wrote:
From: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com>
For PRT support we need mappings which aren't backed by any memory.
Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
index 8e6030d..87eae9b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
@@ -1117,7 +1117,7 @@ int amdgpu_vm_bo_update(struct amdgpu_device
*adev,
struct fence *exclusive;
int r;
- if (clear) {
+ if (clear || !bo_va->bo) {
mem = NULL;
nodes = NULL;
exclusive = NULL;
@@ -1134,9 +1134,15 @@ int amdgpu_vm_bo_update(struct amdgpu_device
*adev,
exclusive = reservation_object_get_excl(bo_va->bo->tbo.resv);
}
- flags = amdgpu_ttm_tt_pte_flags(adev, bo_va->bo->tbo.ttm, mem);
- gtt_flags = (amdgpu_ttm_is_bound(bo_va->bo->tbo.ttm) &&
- adev == amdgpu_ttm_adev(bo_va->bo->tbo.bdev)) ? flags : 0;
+ if (bo_va->bo) {
+ flags = amdgpu_ttm_tt_pte_flags(adev, bo_va->bo->tbo.ttm, mem);
+ gtt_flags = (amdgpu_ttm_is_bound(bo_va->bo->tbo.ttm) &&
+ adev == amdgpu_ttm_adev(bo_va->bo->tbo.bdev)) ?
+ flags : 0;
+ } else {
+ flags = 0x0;
+ gtt_flags = ~0x0;
+ }
spin_lock(&vm->status_lock);
if (!list_empty(&bo_va->vm_status))
@@ -1271,7 +1277,8 @@ struct amdgpu_bo_va *amdgpu_vm_bo_add(struct
amdgpu_device *adev,
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&bo_va->invalids);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&bo_va->vm_status);
- list_add_tail(&bo_va->bo_list, &bo->va);
+ if (bo)
+ list_add_tail(&bo_va->bo_list, &bo->va);
return bo_va;
}
@@ -1309,7 +1316,8 @@ int amdgpu_vm_bo_map(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
/* make sure object fit at this offset */
eaddr = saddr + size - 1;
- if ((saddr >= eaddr) || (offset + size >
amdgpu_bo_size(bo_va->bo)))
+ if (bo_va->bo && (saddr >= eaddr ||
+ (offset + size > amdgpu_bo_size(bo_va->bo))))
return -EINVAL;
At least the saddr >= eaddr check should probably apply apply.
Oh, yes of course.
Come to think of it, what if offset + size wraps around?
Well that is exactly what the saddr >= eaddr check is good for :)
But eaddr doesn't take offset into account. It seems to me that offset
can be arbitrarily large and this isn't checked anywhere. At least I
don't see it.
Nicolai
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
