Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drm/ttm: provide default page protection for UML | From | Anton Ivanov <> | Date | Thu, 2 Sep 2021 07:19:01 +0100 |
| |
On 02/09/2021 06:52, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 9/1/21 10:48 PM, Anton Ivanov wrote: >> On 02/09/2021 03:01, Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> boot_cpu_data [struct cpuinfo_um (on UML)] does not have a struct >>> member named 'x86', so provide a default page protection mode >>> for CONFIG_UML. >>> >>> Mends this build error: >>> ../drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_module.c: In function >>> ‘ttm_prot_from_caching’: >>> ../drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_module.c:59:24: error: ‘struct cpuinfo_um’ >>> has no member named ‘x86’ >>> else if (boot_cpu_data.x86 > 3) >>> ^ >>> >>> Fixes: 3bf3710e3718 ("drm/ttm: Add a generic TTM memcpy move for >>> page-based iomem") >>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> >>> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> >>> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> >>> Cc: Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com> >>> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >>> Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com> >>> Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> >>> Cc: Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com> >>> Cc: linux-um@lists.infradead.org >>> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie> >>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_module.c | 4 ++++ >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>> >>> --- linux-next-20210901.orig/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_module.c >>> +++ linux-next-20210901/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_module.c >>> @@ -53,6 +53,9 @@ pgprot_t ttm_prot_from_caching(enum ttm_ >>> if (caching == ttm_cached) >>> return tmp; >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_UML >>> + tmp = pgprot_noncached(tmp); >>> +#else >>> #if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) >>> if (caching == ttm_write_combined) >>> tmp = pgprot_writecombine(tmp); >>> @@ -69,6 +72,7 @@ pgprot_t ttm_prot_from_caching(enum ttm_ >>> #if defined(__sparc__) >>> tmp = pgprot_noncached(tmp); >>> #endif >>> +#endif >>> return tmp; >>> } >> >> Patch looks OK. >> >> I have a question though - why all of DRM is not !UML in config. Not >> like we can use them. > > I have no idea about that. > Hopefully one of the (other) UML maintainers can answer you.
Touche.
We will discuss that and possibly push a patch to !UML that part of the tree. IMHO it is not applicable.
A.
> > thanks.
-- Anton R. Ivanov Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661 https://www.cambridgegreys.com/
| |