Re: [PATCH 0/4] gtt abstractions

[Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:50:11 +0100
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Whith Ben wrestling the gtt code and trying to finally wear us off the intel-gtt
> fix I've figured I might as well drop my idea for how we could better organize
> the pte writing/clearing.
> 
> With these patches there's no a clean cut between the code which manages the
> address spaces and the code which writes (global/pp) gtt ptes. Which should
> nicely pave the way for cool things to happen, like real per-process address
> spaces.
> 
> Comments highly welcome.

Patches 1, and 2 from my original RFC rebase on top of this pretty
nicely. I'd like to keep those, as it completes ripping out the.

Also, given what I know about the future, I still like the (unposted)
RFC I was working on as I think it makes everything cleaner - but you
weild the power, and I just want to get real work done.

I'll post the rebased 2 patches to this series in a few minutes.

> 
> Cheers, Daniel
> 
> Daniel Vetter (4):
>   drm/i915: vfuncs for gtt_clear_range/insert_entries
>   drm/i915: vfuncs for ppgtt
>   drm/i915: pte_encode is gen6+
>   drm/i915: extract hw ppgtt setup/cleanup code
> 
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h     |  32 +++-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 310 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  2 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)
> 


-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center