Hi Chris,


+static struct drm_i915_gem_object*
+i915_gem_execbuffer_parse(struct intel_engine_cs *ring,
+                         struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *shadow_exec_entry,
+                         struct eb_vmas *eb,
+                         struct drm_i915_gem_object *batch_obj,
+                         u32 batch_start_offset,
+                         u32 batch_len,
+                         bool is_master,
+                         u32 *flags)
+{
+       struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(batch_obj->base.dev);
+       struct drm_i915_gem_object *shadow_batch_obj;
+       int ret;
+
+       shadow_batch_obj = i915_gem_batch_pool_get(&dev_priv->mm.batch_pool,
+                                                  batch_obj->base.size);
+       if (IS_ERR(shadow_batch_obj))
+               return shadow_batch_obj;
+
+       shadow_batch_obj->madv = I915_MADV_WILLNEED;
+
+       ret = i915_gem_obj_ggtt_pin(shadow_batch_obj, 4096, 0);
+       if (ret)
+               goto err;

Pardon? This feels an implementation issue of i915_parse_cmds() and should
be resolved there. Presumably you are not actually reading back through
the GTT? That would be insane...

+       ret = i915_parse_cmds(ring,
+                             batch_obj,
+                             shadow_batch_obj,
+                             batch_start_offset,
+                             batch_len,
+                             is_master);
+       i915_gem_object_ggtt_unpin(shadow_batch_obj);

Yet pin+unpin around the parser seems to serve no other purpose.
Are you suggesting to remove the pin/unpin calls? If so, isn't pinning needed to ensure the backing store pages are available in vmap_batch()? i.e. obj->pages->sgl is populated w/ physical pages.

Or, are you suggesting to move the pin/unpin calls inside i915_parse_cmds() ?

Thx,
Mike
-Chris



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

Reply via email to