Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] i965/gen9: Pass alignment as function parameter in drm_intel_gem_bo_alloc_internal()

[Anuj Phogat <anuj.phogat@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 09:51:08PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:47:02AM -0700, Anuj Phogat wrote:
>> > and use it to initialize the align variable in drm_intel_bo.
>> >
>> > In case of YF/YS tiled buffers libdrm need not know about the tiling
>> > format because these buffers don't have hardware support to be tiled
>> > or detiled through a fenced region. But, libdrm still need to know
>> > about buffer alignment restrictions because kernel uses it when
>> > resolving the relocation.
>> >
>> > Mesa uses drm_intel_gem_bo_alloc_for_render() to allocate Yf/Ys buffers.
>> > So, use the passed alignment value in this function. Note that we continue
>> > ignoring the alignment value passed to drm_intel_gem_bo_alloc() to follow
>> > the previous behavior.
>> >
>> > V2: Add a condition to avoid allocation from cache. (Ben)
>>
>> This will hurt badly since some programs love to cycle through textures.
>> You can still allocate from the cache, you only need to update the
>> alignement constraint. The kernel will move the buffer on the next execbuf
>> if it's misplaced.
>
> For llc, using fresh pages just puts memory and aperture pressure (plus
> a small amount of interface pressure) on the system by allocating more bo.
>
> For !llc, it is far better to move an object in the GTT to match a
> change in alignment than it is to allocate fresh pages (and deallocate
> stale pages).
Could you please explain this and point me to what you want to be
changed in this patch?

> -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