Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-15 Thread John Stultz
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 1:03 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:08 PM Chris Wilson > wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 20:50:11) > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Chris Wilson > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 14:06:04) > > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-15 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-14 09:47:40) > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:45:37AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-14 09:30:32) > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:23 AM Chris Wilson > > > wrote: > > > > The only other problem I see with the implementation is that there's

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-14 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 09:45:37AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-14 09:30:32) > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:23 AM Chris Wilson > > wrote: > > > The only other problem I see with the implementation is that there's > > > nothing that says that each dmabuf->ops->map_dm

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-14 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-14 09:30:32) > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:23 AM Chris Wilson > wrote: > > The only other problem I see with the implementation is that there's > > nothing that says that each dmabuf->ops->map_dma_buf() returns a new > > sg_table, so we may end up undoing the xor. Or

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-14 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:23 AM Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-14 09:02:57) > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:08 PM Chris Wilson > > wrote: > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 20:50:11) > > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Chris Wilson > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-14 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-14 09:02:57) > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:08 PM Chris Wilson > wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 20:50:11) > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Chris Wilson > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 14:06:04) > > > > > We have too

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-14 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:08 PM Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 20:50:11) > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Chris Wilson > > wrote: > > > > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 14:06:04) > > > > We have too many people abusing the struct page they can get at but > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-13 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 20:50:11) > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 14:06:04) > > > We have too many people abusing the struct page they can get at but > > > really shouldn't in importers. Aside from that the backing page migh

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 14:06:04) > > We have too many people abusing the struct page they can get at but > > really shouldn't in importers. Aside from that the backing page might > > simply not exist (for dynamic p2p mappings) look

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm-buf: Add debug option

2021-01-13 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2021-01-13 14:06:04) > We have too many people abusing the struct page they can get at but > really shouldn't in importers. Aside from that the backing page might > simply not exist (for dynamic p2p mappings) looking at it and using it > e.g. for mmap can also wreak the page