Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/20/2017 08:52 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/20/2017 08:17 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/20/2017 07:38 PM, Rob Clark wrote:

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/20/2017 08:52 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/20/2017 08:17 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/20/2017 07:38 PM, Rob Clark wrote:

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/20/2017 08:17 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/20/2017 07:38 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote:

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: Hello, I am writing a para-virtualized DRM driver for Xen hypervisor and it now works with DRM CMA helpers, but I would also like to make it work with non-contigous

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/20/2017 07:38 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: Hello, I am writing a para-virtualized

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > On 03/20/2017 08:17 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko >> wrote: >>> >>> On 03/20/2017 07:38 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Mon, Mar 20,

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > On 03/20/2017 07:38 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > > > On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko >> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> I am writing a para-virtualized DRM driver for Xen

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/18/2017 04:06 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: Hi, Rob On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: Hello, I am writing a

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

Hi, Rob On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: Hello, I am writing a para-virtualized DRM driver for Xen hypervisor and it now works with DRM CMA helpers, but I would also like to make it work with

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On 03/18/2017 04:50 PM, Rob Clark wrote: On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: then TTM might be useful. I was looking into it, but it seems to be an overkill in my case And isn't it that GEM should be used for new drivers, not TTM? Not

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: then TTM might be useful. >>> >>> I was looking into it, but it seems to be an overkill in my case >>> And isn't it that GEM should be used for new drivers, not TTM? >> >> Not really, it's just that

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > Hi, Rob > > On 03/18/2017 02:22 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko >> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> I am writing a para-virtualized DRM driver

Re: GEM allocation for para-virtualized DRM driver

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > Hello, > I am writing a para-virtualized DRM driver for Xen hypervisor > and it now works with DRM CMA helpers, but I would also like > to make it work with non-contigous memory: virtual machine > that the