On 28/09/2023 13:47, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 27/09/2023 14:48, Steven Price wrote:
On 27/09/2023 14:38, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
It is better not to lose precision and not revert to 1 MiB size
granularity for every size greater than 1 MiB.
Sizes in KiB should not be so troublesome to read (and in fact machine
parsing is I expect the norm here), they align with other api like
/proc/meminfo, and they allow writing tests for the interface without
having to embed drm.ko implementation knowledge into them. (Like knowing
that minimum buffer size one can use for successful verification has
to be
1MiB aligned, and on top account for any pre-existing memory utilisation
outside of driver's control.)
But probably even more importantly I think that it is just better to
show
the accurate sizes and not arbitrary lose precision for a little bit
of a
stretched use case of eyeballing fdinfo text directly.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com>
Cc: Adrián Larumbe <adrian.laru...@collabora.com>
Cc: steven.pr...@arm.com
Reviewed-by: Steven Price <steven.pr...@arm.com>
Thanks! Rob? Can we have your blessing? Could you live with KiBs? :)
Acked received on #dri-devel:
[12:15] <tursulin> robclark: ping on
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2023-September/424905.html - can you
live with it or object?
[14:41] <robclark> tursulin: a-b
Adding the drm-misc maintainers with an ask to merge please.
Regards,
Tvrtko
Regards,
Tvrtko
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c
index e692770ef6d3..ecb5038009e7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_file.c
@@ -913,7 +913,7 @@ static void print_size(struct drm_printer *p,
const char *stat,
unsigned u;
for (u = 0; u < ARRAY_SIZE(units) - 1; u++) {
- if (sz < SZ_1K)
+ if (sz == 0 || !IS_ALIGNED(sz, SZ_1K))
break;
sz = div_u64(sz, SZ_1K);
}
