On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 11:47:22AM +0530, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
>
>
> On 7/3/2024 4:09 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 12:22:00PM +0530, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
> >> @@ -268,6 +272,7 @@ struct fastrpc_channel_ctx {
> >>struct fastrpc_session_ctx session[FASTRPC_MAX_SESSIONS];
> >>
On 7/3/2024 4:12 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 12:22:00PM GMT, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
>> Memory intensive applications(which requires more tha 4GB) that wants
>> to offload tasks to DSP might have to split the tasks to multiple
>> user PD to make the resources available. For
On 7/4/2024 11:47 AM, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
>
> On 7/3/2024 4:09 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 12:22:00PM +0530, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
>>> @@ -268,6 +272,7 @@ struct fastrpc_channel_ctx {
>>> struct fastrpc_session_ctx session[FASTRPC_MAX_SESSIONS];
>>> spinlock_t lock;
>>>
On 7/3/2024 4:09 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 12:22:00PM +0530, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
>> @@ -268,6 +272,7 @@ struct fastrpc_channel_ctx {
>> struct fastrpc_session_ctx session[FASTRPC_MAX_SESSIONS];
>> spinlock_t lock;
>> struct idr ctx_idr;
>> +struct ida dsp_pg
On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 12:22:00PM GMT, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
> Memory intensive applications(which requires more tha 4GB) that wants
> to offload tasks to DSP might have to split the tasks to multiple
> user PD to make the resources available. For every call to DSP,
> fastrpc driver passes the proce
On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 12:22:00PM +0530, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
> @@ -268,6 +272,7 @@ struct fastrpc_channel_ctx {
> struct fastrpc_session_ctx session[FASTRPC_MAX_SESSIONS];
> spinlock_t lock;
> struct idr ctx_idr;
> + struct ida dsp_pgid_ida;
You have an idr and an ida? Why
Memory intensive applications(which requires more tha 4GB) that wants
to offload tasks to DSP might have to split the tasks to multiple
user PD to make the resources available. For every call to DSP,
fastrpc driver passes the process tgid which works as an identifier
for the DSP to enqueue the task
