Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/i915: Support for creating Stolen memory backed objects

From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: akash.goel@intel.com, shashidhar.hiremath@intel.com,
	Chris Wilson <chris.wilson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/i915: Support for creating Stolen memory backed objects
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 13:43:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56658D00.1040901@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1447238173-31347-3-git-send-email-ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com>

Hi,

On 11/11/15 10:36, ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com wrote:
> From: Ankitprasad Sharma <ankitprasad.r.sharma@intel.com>
>
> Extend the drm_i915_gem_create structure to add support for
> creating Stolen memory backed objects. Added a new flag through
> which user can specify the preference to allocate the object from
> stolen memory, which if set, an attempt will be made to allocate
> the object from stolen memory subject to the availability of
> free space in the stolen region.
 >
> v2: Rebased to the latest drm-intel-nightly (Ankit)
>
> v3: Changed versioning of GEM_CREATE param, added new comments (Tvrtko)
>
> v4: Changed size from 32b to 64b to prevent userspace overflow (Tvrtko)
> Corrected function arguments ordering (Chris)

Motivated by some questions raised by Dave I went and looked if there is 
something preventing stolen objects use as batch buffers?

I could not find it myself, so the question is can we end up in the 
relocate_entry_cpu with a batch buffer allocated from stolen, which 
would then call i915_gem_object_get_page and crash?

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx