Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-11 Thread James Jones
On 2/10/20 3:35 PM, Ben Skeggs wrote: On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 09:17, James Jones wrote: On 2/10/20 12:25 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: Hi Am 10.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Ben Skeggs: On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 07:10, James Jones wrote: I've sent out a v4 version of the format modifier patches

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-10 Thread Ben Skeggs
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 09:17, James Jones wrote: > > On 2/10/20 12:25 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > > Hi > > > > Am 10.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Ben Skeggs: > >> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 07:10, James Jones wrote: > >>> > >>> I've sent out a v4 version of the format modifier patches which avoid > >>>

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-10 Thread James Jones
On 2/10/20 12:25 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: Hi Am 10.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Ben Skeggs: On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 07:10, James Jones wrote: I've sent out a v4 version of the format modifier patches which avoid caching values in the nouveau_framebuffer struct. It will have a few trivial

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-10 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
Hi Am 10.02.20 um 09:20 schrieb Ben Skeggs: > On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 07:10, James Jones wrote: >> >> I've sent out a v4 version of the format modifier patches which avoid >> caching values in the nouveau_framebuffer struct. It will have a few >> trivial conflicts with your series, but should

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-10 Thread Ben Skeggs
On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 07:10, James Jones wrote: > > I've sent out a v4 version of the format modifier patches which avoid > caching values in the nouveau_framebuffer struct. It will have a few > trivial conflicts with your series, but should make them structurally > compatible. > > I'm fine with

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-07 Thread James Jones
I've sent out a v4 version of the format modifier patches which avoid caching values in the nouveau_framebuffer struct. It will have a few trivial conflicts with your series, but should make them structurally compatible. I'm fine with either v3 or v4 of my series personally, but if these

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread James Jones
Yes, that's certainly viable. If that's the general preference in direction, I'll rework that patches to do so. Thanks, -James On 2/6/20 7:49 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: Hi James Am 06.02.20 um 16:17 schrieb James Jones: Note I'm adding some fields to nouveau_framebuffer in the series

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread James Jones
Yes, that's certainly viable. If that's the general preference in direction, I'll rework that patches to do so. Thanks, -James On 2/6/20 7:49 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: Hi James Am 06.02.20 um 16:17 schrieb James Jones: Note I'm adding some fields to nouveau_framebuffer in the series

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread James Jones
What object would ultimately provide the physical backing for the VA you described below? I assumed it would be a bo. E.g., a Vulkan application creates or imports some image backed by some memory that gets represented as a bo in the kernel, then creates a framebuffer on that bo with a

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
Hi James Am 06.02.20 um 16:17 schrieb James Jones: > Note I'm adding some fields to nouveau_framebuffer in the series > "drm/nouveau: Support NVIDIA format modifiers."  I sent out v3 of that > yesterday.  It would probably still be possible to avoid them by > re-extracting the relevant data from

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread Ilia Mirkin
So ... for Vulkan, the API requires allocating VA before declaring what goes into that VA (e.g. an image or data). I believe our plan for that was to move all this into userspace, which would allocate VA and then just tell the kernel "make VA range X have memtype Y". At that point, nouveau_bo

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread James Jones
The format modifiers, when present, override the equivalent field in the BO. Right now, that's probably not particularly useful. However, as nouveau interfaces evolve towards the HW capabilities and add support for newer graphics APIs, saying an entire BO has a singular layout becomes less

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread Roy Spliet
(Re-sending to list rather than just to James) Is this format modifier information not stored, or otherwise worth storing, directly in the nouveau_bo object associated with the framebuffer? I'm not particularly knowledgeable on the topic, but there already seem to exist some fields with very

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread James Jones
Note I'm adding some fields to nouveau_framebuffer in the series "drm/nouveau: Support NVIDIA format modifiers." I sent out v3 of that yesterday. It would probably still be possible to avoid them by re-extracting the relevant data from the format modifier on the fly when needed, but it is

[Nouveau] [PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Remove struct nouveau_framebuffer

2020-02-06 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
After its cleanup, struct nouveau_framebuffer is only a wrapper around struct drm_framebuffer. Use the latter directly. Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/wndw.c | 26 +++ drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c | 14 ++--