Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Add soft-pinning API for execbuffer

From: "Kristian Høgsberg" <krh@bitplanet.net>
To: "Chris Wilson" <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	"Jesse Barnes" <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
	"Kristian Høgsberg" <krh@bitplanet.net>,
	"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Add soft-pinning API for execbuffer
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 15:58:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOeoa-e9yE_iScWhf3vccidfC8cpGzA51gFsYHwgJch7rAApnA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151106133834.GF669@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:17:56AM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> On 11/05/2015 09:51 AM, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> Userspace can pass in an offset that it presumes the object is located
>> >> at. The kernel will then do its utmost to fit the object into that
>> >> location. The assumption is that userspace is handling its own object
>> >> locations (for example along with full-ppgtt) and that the kernel will
>> >> rarely have to make space for the user's requests.
>> >
>> > I know the commit message isn't documentation, but the phrase "do its
>> > utmost" makes me uncomfortable. I'd like to be explicit about what
>> > might make it fail (should only be pinned fbs in case of aliased ppgtt
>> > or userspace errors such as overlapping placements), or conversely,
>> > spell out when the flag can be expected to work (full ppgtt).
>>
>> Ooh yeah that would be good to add to the execbuf man page with the
>> softpin additions.  Oh wait, we don't have a man page for execbuf?
>> Someone should write one!
>
> How about:
>
>     This extends the DRM_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2 ioctl to do the following:
>     * if the user supplies a virtual address via the execobject->offset
>       *and* sets the EXEC_OBJECT_PINNED flag in execobject->flags, then
>       that object is placed at that offset in the address space selected
>       by the context specifier in execbuffer.
>     * the location must be aligned to the GTT page size, 4096 bytes
>     * as the object is placed exactly as specified, it may be used in this batch
>       without relocations pointing to it
>
>     It may fail to do so if:
>     * EINVAL is returned if the object does not have a 4096 byte aligned
>       address
>     * the object conflicts with another pinned object (either pinned by
>       hardware in that address space, e.g. scanouts in the aliasing ppgtt)
>       or within the same batch.
>       EBUSY is returned if the location is pinned by hardware
>       EINVAL is returned if the location is already in use by the batch
>     * EINVAL is returned if the object conflicts with its own alignment (as meets
>       the hardware requirements) or if the placement of the object does not fit
>       within the address space
>
>     All other execbuffer errors apply.

Yes, that looks better.

Thanks,
Kristian

> -Chris
>
> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx