Hi Chris,
On 5/20/20 12:56 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Nirmoy Das (2020-05-19 09:44:36)
+#define DRM_MM_ALIGN_SHIFT 6 #define HOLE_SIZE(NODE) ((NODE)->hole_size) #define HOLE_ADDR(NODE) (__drm_mm_hole_node_start(NODE)) +#define HOLE_SIZE_ALIGN(NODE) ((NODE->hole_size << DRM_MM_ALIGN_SHIFT) | \
ffs(HOLE_ADDR(NODE)))Fwiw, max hole size of 58b, we would need to stop storing byte extents...
Can you please explain 2nd part of this statement.
static struct drm_mm_node * -next_hole_low_addr(struct drm_mm_node *entry, u64 size) +next_hole_low_addr(struct drm_mm_node *entry, u64 size, u64 alignment) { struct rb_node *rb_node, *right_rb_node, *parent_rb_node; struct drm_mm_node *right_node;
u64 req_align = (size + alignment) << DRM_MM_ALIGN_SHIFT; if (!entry) return NULL;@@ -513,6 +561,7 @@ next_hole_low_addr(struct drm_mm_node *entry, u64 size) right_node = rb_entry(right_rb_node, struct drm_mm_node, rb_hole_addr); if ((right_node->subtree_max_hole < size ||
right_node->subtree_max_hole_align < req_align ||What was the point in storing the packed alignment if we are just searching for a hole big enough for (size + alignment)?
Yes, I realized this is not correct :/
Still thinking about a better solution to capture alignment into subtree elimination.
Regards,
Nirmoy
-Chris _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.free...