From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761495AbYHFRcz (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:32:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755746AbYHFRc3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:32:29 -0400 Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.44.29]:31247 "EHLO yx-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755668AbYHFRc2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:32:28 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Mp0TSLMWUtBUugpmRiN0QL6VHRKqvV7M+NNSJgpkEgHjYUu0+kBEleUb2jpHWfFR0j SK//SZqsSqmBzxMi/2scdVtNpSZ8gzxrL4H2kiaPKLcGUZ8/bd0KO7Ep5dpGn2sLLeag NNGUAhYq7b7CC3VAH+UXo66mkoq80tZw70XdE= Message-ID: <6a89f9d50808061032k6c30887cg6bed0259f9620b1b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:32:26 +0200 From: "Stephane Marchesin" To: "Arjan van de Ven" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Export shmem_file_setup and shmem_getpage for DRM-GEM Cc: "Keith Packard" , "John Stoffel" , "Hugh Dickins" , "Nick Piggin" , "Christoph Hellwig" , "Eric Anholt" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080806102437.2d5e5d11@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1217573919-7496-1-git-send-email-eric@anholt.net> <1217870748.24714.79.camel@koto.keithp.com> <1217877645.24714.87.camel@koto.keithp.com> <18583.47633.987143.236236@stoffel.org> <1217910505.24714.152.camel@koto.keithp.com> <6a89f9d50808060920t168d533g5d440b444e7c09fc@mail.gmail.com> <20080806102437.2d5e5d11@infradead.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: b2c5619aec701e58 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 8/6/08, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 18:20:40 +0200 > "Stephane Marchesin" wrote: > > > On 8/5/08, Keith Packard wrote: > > > On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:25 -0400, John Stoffel wrote: > > > > > > > What about the onboard memory of graphics cards? Isn't that > > > > where Textures and such are stored as well? So once something > > > > is loaded to the card, shouldn't you be able to free it in > > > > system memory? Or swap it out ahead of time? > > > > > > > > > Right now, I'm working only on Intel integrated graphics, which > > > doesn't have any on-board memory. My thinking is that we'd best > > > solve the easiest case first before attempting the harder discrete > > > graphics driver. Plus, Intel pays me do do integrated graphics, so > > > I have an incentive. > > > > > > > Right, but it sounds adventurous to merge this work upstream before it > > is generic enough to work on discrete cards. Right now it only works > > on intel integrated cards ; integrated cards are one business, > > discrete are a completely different world and the issues afoot > > completely different. > > > > Should this go upstream, the kernel guys have to keep in mind and > > accept the possibility that another memory manager might be needed at > > some point. > > > the ATI driver guys already have the interface working. > No they don't. There is only preliminary code. > In addition.. since when is "oh you must also make it work for THAT" a > requirement? Traditionally, it's up to the second person to make > generic code work for them (within reason of course, but I'll argue > that the bar of reasonableness has been met here) > Right, but the current code will basically force the discrete card drivers to implement backing store for all allocations. Do we want this ? Also, for cards that can handle page-based memory allocations, there is no way to make use of this feature, do we want this too ? Stephane