All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	DRI <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the amdgpu tree with the drm-misc tree
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:38:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <17b8fbf1-0765-5189-6a8b-cd1d05bcd052@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220429111354.197c6dee@canb.auug.org.au>

Am 29.04.22 um 03:13 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:34:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the amdgpu tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>    fee2ede15542 ("drm/ttm: rework bulk move handling v5")
>>>
>>> from the drm-misc tree and commit:
>>>
>>>    184a69ca4d41 ("drm/amdgpu: separate VM PT handling into amdgpu_vm_pt.c")
>>>
>>> from the amdgpu tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (I used this file from the latter and added the following
>>> patch) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as
>>> linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned
>>> to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.
>>> You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the
>>> conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
>>>
>>> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:28:53 +1000
>>> Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "drm/ttm: rework bulk move handling v5"
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> index 958d7ed97882..a29933fa001f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> @@ -630,7 +630,14 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_pt_free(struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *entry)
>>>   
>>>   	if (!entry->bo)
>>>   		return;
>>> +
>>>   	shadow = amdgpu_bo_shadowed(entry->bo);
>>> +	if (shadow) {
>>> +		ttm_bo_set_bulk_move(&shadow->tbo, NULL);
>>> +		amdgpu_bo_unref(&shadow);
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	ttm_bo_set_bulk_move(&entry->bo->tbo, NULL);
>>>   	entry->bo->vm_bo = NULL;
>>>   	list_del(&entry->vm_status);
>>>   	amdgpu_bo_unref(&shadow);
>>> @@ -653,8 +660,6 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_pt_free_dfs(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>>   	struct amdgpu_vm_pt_cursor cursor;
>>>   	struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *entry;
>>>   
>>> -	vm->bulk_moveable = false;
>>> -
>>>   	for_each_amdgpu_vm_pt_dfs_safe(adev, vm, start, cursor, entry)
>>>   		amdgpu_vm_pt_free(entry);
>>>   
>>> -- 
>>> 2.35.1
>> This is now a conflict between the drm tree and the amdgpu tree.
> I noticed that commit 184a69ca4d41 was merged into the drm tree but
> only the second hunk of this merge fixup was applied.  So is the first
> hunk above unnecessary?

Ah! Thanks a lot for noticing this.

And the hunk is absolutely necessary and we already have a bug report 
that it is missing wondering why I can't reproduce this.

Thanks,
Christian.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	DRI <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the amdgpu tree with the drm-misc tree
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:38:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <17b8fbf1-0765-5189-6a8b-cd1d05bcd052@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220429111354.197c6dee@canb.auug.org.au>

Am 29.04.22 um 03:13 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:34:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the amdgpu tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>    fee2ede15542 ("drm/ttm: rework bulk move handling v5")
>>>
>>> from the drm-misc tree and commit:
>>>
>>>    184a69ca4d41 ("drm/amdgpu: separate VM PT handling into amdgpu_vm_pt.c")
>>>
>>> from the amdgpu tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (I used this file from the latter and added the following
>>> patch) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as
>>> linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned
>>> to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.
>>> You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the
>>> conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
>>>
>>> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:28:53 +1000
>>> Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "drm/ttm: rework bulk move handling v5"
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> index 958d7ed97882..a29933fa001f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> @@ -630,7 +630,14 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_pt_free(struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *entry)
>>>   
>>>   	if (!entry->bo)
>>>   		return;
>>> +
>>>   	shadow = amdgpu_bo_shadowed(entry->bo);
>>> +	if (shadow) {
>>> +		ttm_bo_set_bulk_move(&shadow->tbo, NULL);
>>> +		amdgpu_bo_unref(&shadow);
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	ttm_bo_set_bulk_move(&entry->bo->tbo, NULL);
>>>   	entry->bo->vm_bo = NULL;
>>>   	list_del(&entry->vm_status);
>>>   	amdgpu_bo_unref(&shadow);
>>> @@ -653,8 +660,6 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_pt_free_dfs(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>>   	struct amdgpu_vm_pt_cursor cursor;
>>>   	struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *entry;
>>>   
>>> -	vm->bulk_moveable = false;
>>> -
>>>   	for_each_amdgpu_vm_pt_dfs_safe(adev, vm, start, cursor, entry)
>>>   		amdgpu_vm_pt_free(entry);
>>>   
>>> -- 
>>> 2.35.1
>> This is now a conflict between the drm tree and the amdgpu tree.
> I noticed that commit 184a69ca4d41 was merged into the drm tree but
> only the second hunk of this merge fixup was applied.  So is the first
> hunk above unnecessary?

Ah! Thanks a lot for noticing this.

And the hunk is absolutely necessary and we already have a bug report 
that it is missing wondering why I can't reproduce this.

Thanks,
Christian.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	DRI <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: manual merge of the amdgpu tree with the drm-misc tree
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:38:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <17b8fbf1-0765-5189-6a8b-cd1d05bcd052@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220429111354.197c6dee@canb.auug.org.au>

Am 29.04.22 um 03:13 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:34:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the amdgpu tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>    fee2ede15542 ("drm/ttm: rework bulk move handling v5")
>>>
>>> from the drm-misc tree and commit:
>>>
>>>    184a69ca4d41 ("drm/amdgpu: separate VM PT handling into amdgpu_vm_pt.c")
>>>
>>> from the amdgpu tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (I used this file from the latter and added the following
>>> patch) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as
>>> linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned
>>> to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.
>>> You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the
>>> conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
>>>
>>> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:28:53 +1000
>>> Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "drm/ttm: rework bulk move handling v5"
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c | 9 +++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> index 958d7ed97882..a29933fa001f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm_pt.c
>>> @@ -630,7 +630,14 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_pt_free(struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *entry)
>>>   
>>>   	if (!entry->bo)
>>>   		return;
>>> +
>>>   	shadow = amdgpu_bo_shadowed(entry->bo);
>>> +	if (shadow) {
>>> +		ttm_bo_set_bulk_move(&shadow->tbo, NULL);
>>> +		amdgpu_bo_unref(&shadow);
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	ttm_bo_set_bulk_move(&entry->bo->tbo, NULL);
>>>   	entry->bo->vm_bo = NULL;
>>>   	list_del(&entry->vm_status);
>>>   	amdgpu_bo_unref(&shadow);
>>> @@ -653,8 +660,6 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_pt_free_dfs(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>>   	struct amdgpu_vm_pt_cursor cursor;
>>>   	struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *entry;
>>>   
>>> -	vm->bulk_moveable = false;
>>> -
>>>   	for_each_amdgpu_vm_pt_dfs_safe(adev, vm, start, cursor, entry)
>>>   		amdgpu_vm_pt_free(entry);
>>>   
>>> -- 
>>> 2.35.1
>> This is now a conflict between the drm tree and the amdgpu tree.
> I noticed that commit 184a69ca4d41 was merged into the drm tree but
> only the second hunk of this merge fixup was applied.  So is the first
> hunk above unnecessary?

Ah! Thanks a lot for noticing this.

And the hunk is absolutely necessary and we already have a bug report 
that it is missing wondering why I can't reproduce this.

Thanks,
Christian.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-29 10:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-06  0:34 linux-next: manual merge of the amdgpu tree with the drm-misc tree Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-06  0:34 ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-06  0:34 ` [Intel-gfx] " Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-06  2:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for " Patchwork
2022-04-13  0:10 ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-13  0:10   ` [Intel-gfx] " Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-13  0:10   ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-29  1:13   ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-29  1:13     ` [Intel-gfx] " Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-29  1:13     ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-04-29 10:38     ` Christian König [this message]
2022-04-29 10:38       ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2022-04-29 10:38       ` Christian König
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-05-15  1:18 Stephen Rothwell
2023-05-15  1:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2023-01-16  0:48 Stephen Rothwell
2023-01-16  0:48 ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-11-16  0:09 Stephen Rothwell
2022-11-16  0:09 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-13 15:08 broonie
2021-06-03  2:48 Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-03  2:48 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-03  2:55 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-03  2:55   ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-04  2:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-06-04  2:33   ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:42 Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:42 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:38 Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:20 Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:16 Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-21  1:16 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-12  0:20 Stephen Rothwell
2021-05-12  0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=17b8fbf1-0765-5189-6a8b-cd1d05bcd052@amd.com \
    --to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
    --cc=alexdeucher@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.