On 1/26/22 16:21, Matthew Auld wrote:
If we need to make room for some some mappable object, then we should only victimize objects that have one or pages that occupy the visible portion of LMEM. Let's also create a new priority hint for objects that are placed in mappable memory, where we know that CPU access was requested, that way we hopefully victimize these last.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld matthew.auld@intel.com Cc: Thomas Hellström thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c index e4cd6ccf5ab1..8376e4c3d290 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c @@ -5,8 +5,10 @@
#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h> #include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h> +#include <drm/drm_buddy.h>
#include "i915_drv.h" +#include "i915_ttm_buddy_manager.h" #include "intel_memory_region.h" #include "intel_region_ttm.h"
@@ -20,6 +22,7 @@ #define I915_TTM_PRIO_PURGE 0 #define I915_TTM_PRIO_NO_PAGES 1 #define I915_TTM_PRIO_HAS_PAGES 2 +#define I915_TTM_PRIO_NEEDS_CPU_ACCESS 3
/*
- Size of struct ttm_place vector in on-stack struct ttm_placement allocs
@@ -337,6 +340,7 @@ static bool i915_ttm_eviction_valuable(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, const struct ttm_place *place) { struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = i915_ttm_to_gem(bo);
struct ttm_resource *res = bo->resource;
if (!obj) return false;
@@ -350,7 +354,48 @@ static bool i915_ttm_eviction_valuable(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, return false;
/* Will do for now. Our pinned objects are still on TTM's LRU lists */
- return i915_gem_object_evictable(obj);
- if (!i915_gem_object_evictable(obj))
return false;- switch (res->mem_type) {
- case TTM_PL_PRIV: {
We should use the I915_ placements for better readability.
Otherwise Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellström thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com