Hi Jerome,
This patch seems to have plenty of Cc:s, but none of the right ones :)
For further iterations, I guess you could use git option --cc to make
sure everyone gets the whole series, and still keep the Cc:s in the
patches themselves relevant to subsystems.
This doesn't seem to be on top of drm-tip, but on top of your previous
patches(?) that I had some comments about. Could you take a moment to
first address the couple of question I had, before proceeding to discuss
what is built on top of that base.
My reply's Message-ID is:
154289518994.19402.3481838548028068...@jlahtine-desk.ger.corp.intel.com
Regards, Joonas
PS. Please keep me Cc:d in the following patches, I'm keen on
understanding the motive and benefits.
Quoting jgli...@redhat.com (2019-01-24 00:23:14)
> From: Jérôme Glisse <jgli...@redhat.com>
>
> When range of virtual address is updated read only and corresponding
> user ptr object are already read only it is pointless to do anything.
> Optimize this case out.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jérôme Glisse <jgli...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com>
> Cc: Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz>
> Cc: Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehl...@amd.com>
> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <j...@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawil...@microsoft.com>
> Cc: Ross Zwisler <zwis...@kernel.org>
> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mho...@kernel.org>
> Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampb...@nvidia.com>
> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubb...@nvidia.com>
> Cc: k...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: linux-r...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-fsde...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> index 9558582c105e..23330ac3d7ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c
> @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ struct i915_mmu_object {
> struct interval_tree_node it;
> struct list_head link;
> struct work_struct work;
> + bool read_only;
> bool attached;
> };
>
> @@ -119,6 +120,7 @@ static int
> i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *_mn,
> container_of(_mn, struct i915_mmu_notifier, mn);
> struct i915_mmu_object *mo;
> struct interval_tree_node *it;
> + bool update_to_read_only;
> LIST_HEAD(cancelled);
> unsigned long end;
>
> @@ -128,6 +130,8 @@ static int
> i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *_mn,
> /* interval ranges are inclusive, but invalidate range is exclusive */
> end = range->end - 1;
>
> + update_to_read_only = mmu_notifier_range_update_to_read_only(range);
> +
> spin_lock(&mn->lock);
> it = interval_tree_iter_first(&mn->objects, range->start, end);
> while (it) {
> @@ -145,6 +149,17 @@ static int
> i915_gem_userptr_mn_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *_mn,
> * object if it is not in the process of being destroyed.
> */
> mo = container_of(it, struct i915_mmu_object, it);
> +
> + /*
> + * If it is already read only and we are updating to
> + * read only then we do not need to change anything.
> + * So save time and skip this one.
> + */
> + if (update_to_read_only && mo->read_only) {
> + it = interval_tree_iter_next(it, range->start, end);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> if (kref_get_unless_zero(&mo->obj->base.refcount))
> queue_work(mn->wq, &mo->work);
>
> @@ -270,6 +285,7 @@ i915_gem_userptr_init__mmu_notifier(struct
> drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> mo->mn = mn;
> mo->obj = obj;
> mo->it.start = obj->userptr.ptr;
> + mo->read_only = i915_gem_object_is_readonly(obj);
> mo->it.last = obj->userptr.ptr + obj->base.size - 1;
> INIT_WORK(&mo->work, cancel_userptr);
>
> --
> 2.17.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-de...@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
