Am 19.05.22 um 15:19 schrieb Ruhl, Michael J:
-----Original Message----- From: dri-devel dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org On Behalf Of Christian König Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 5:55 AM To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: matthew.william.auld@gmail.com; Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: [PATCH 02/11] drm/nouveau: switch over to ttm_bo_init_reserved
Use the new interface instead.
Signed-off-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c | 10 +++++++--- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c index 05076e530e7d..858b9382036c 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c @@ -302,19 +302,23 @@ nouveau_bo_init(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo, u64 size, int align, u32 domain, struct sg_table *sg, struct dma_resv *robj) { int type = sg ? ttm_bo_type_sg : ttm_bo_type_device;
struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx = { false, false }; int ret;
nouveau_bo_placement_set(nvbo, domain, 0); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&nvbo->io_reserve_lru);
- ret = ttm_bo_init(nvbo->bo.bdev, &nvbo->bo, size, type,
&nvbo->placement, align >> PAGE_SHIFT, false, sg,robj, nouveau_bo_del_ttm);
- ret = ttm_bo_init_reserved(nvbo->bo.bdev, &nvbo->bo, size, type,
&nvbo->placement, align >> PAGE_SHIFT,&ctx,
sg, robj, nouveau_bo_del_ttm);if (ret) { /* ttm will call nouveau_bo_del_ttm if it fails.. */ return ret; }
if (!robj)
ttm_bo_unreserve(&nvbo->bo);Ok, this implies that patch 1 does have an issue.
I see this usage in patch 1, 2, and 3. Would it make sense to move this _unreserve to ttm_bo_init_reserved?
Well the whole point of ttm_bo_init_reserved is that you need to do the un-reserve manually.
But yeah, you are right. It would just make much more sense to rename ttm_bo_init() instead of adjusting all of it's users.
Thanks, Christian.
Mike
return 0; }
-- 2.25.1