On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:44:52PM +0200, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
> On Thursday, 12 January 2017 10:33:47 EET Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:17:39PM +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> > > Since commit 4741da925fa3 ("drm/i915/guc: Assert that all GGTT
> > > offsets used by the GuC are
On Thursday, 12 January 2017 10:33:47 EET Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:17:39PM +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> > Since commit 4741da925fa3 ("drm/i915/guc: Assert that all GGTT
> > offsets used by the GuC are mappable"), we're asserting that GuC
> > firmware is in the GuC mappab
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:17:39PM +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> Since commit 4741da925fa3 ("drm/i915/guc: Assert that all GGTT offsets used
> by the GuC are mappable"), we're asserting that GuC firmware is in the
> GuC mappable range.
> Except we're not pinning the object with bias, which means
On 11/01/17 07:17, Michał Winiarski wrote:
Since commit 4741da925fa3 ("drm/i915/guc: Assert that all GGTT offsets used
by the GuC are mappable"), we're asserting that GuC firmware is in the
GuC mappable range.
Except we're not pinning the object with bias, which means it's possible
to trigger t
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:17:39PM +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> Since commit 4741da925fa3 ("drm/i915/guc: Assert that all GGTT offsets used
> by the GuC are mappable"), we're asserting that GuC firmware is in the
> GuC mappable range.
> Except we're not pinning the object with bias, which means
Since commit 4741da925fa3 ("drm/i915/guc: Assert that all GGTT offsets used
by the GuC are mappable"), we're asserting that GuC firmware is in the
GuC mappable range.
Except we're not pinning the object with bias, which means it's possible
to trigger this assert. Let's add a proper bias.
Cc: Chris
