We can already clear an object with the blt, so try to do the same to
support copying from one object backing store to another. Really this is
just object -> object, which is not that useful yet, what we really want
is two backing stores, but that will require some vma rework first,
otherwise we are stuck with "tmp" objects.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190810174338.19810-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
As pointed out by Chris, with our current approach we are actually
limited to S16_MAX * PAGE_SIZE for our size when using the blt to clear
pages. Keeping things simple try to fix this by reducing the copy to a
sequence of S16_MAX * PAGE_SIZE blocks.
Reported-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
[ickle: hide the details of the engine pool inside emit_vma]
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190810092945.2762-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
The plan is to use the blitter engine for async object clearing when
using local memory, but before we can move the worker to get_pages() we
have to first tame some more of our struct_mutex usage. With this in
mind we should be able to upstream the object clearing as some
selftests, which should serve as a guinea pig for the ongoing locking
rework and upcoming async get_pages() framework.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: CQ Tang <cq.tang@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190529123108.24422-2-matthew.auld@intel.com
