Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:56:43 +0100
From:   Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
To:     Thomas =?utf-8?Q?Hellstr=C3=B6m_=28VMware=29?= 
        <thomas_os@shipmail.org>
Cc:     dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Guillaume.Gardet@arm.com,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, gurchetansingh@chromium.org,
        tzimmermann@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] drm/shmem: add support for per object caching
 flags.
Message-ID: <20200227105643.h4klc3ybhpwv2l3x@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
References: <20200226154752.24328-1-kraxel@redhat.com>
 <20200226154752.24328-2-kraxel@redhat.com>
 <f1afba4b-9c06-48a3-42c7-046695947e91@shipmail.org>
 <20200227075321.ki74hfjpnsqv2yx2@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
 <41ca197c-136a-75d8-b269-801db44d4cba@shipmail.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41ca197c-136a-75d8-b269-801db44d4cba@shipmail.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

  Hi,

> I think it might be safe for some integrated graphics where the driver
> maintainers can guarantee that it's safe on all particular processors used
> with that driver, but then IMO it should be moved out to those drivers.
> 
> Other drivers needing write-combine shouldn't really use shmem.
> 
> So again, to fix the regression, could we revert 0be895893607f ("drm/shmem:
> switch shmem helper to &drm_gem_object_funcs.mmap") or does that have other
> implications?

This patch isn't a regression.  The old code path has the
pgprot_writecombine() call in drm_gem_mmap_obj(), so the behavior
is the same before and afterwards.

But with the patch in place we can easily have shmem helpers do their
own thing instead of depending on whatever drm_gem_mmap_obj() is doing.
Just using cached mappings unconditionally would be perfectly fine for
virtio-gpu.

Not sure about the other users though.  I'd like to fix the virtio-gpu
regression (coming from ttm -> shmem switch) asap, and I don't feel like
changing the behavior for other drivers in 5.6-rc is a good idea.

So I'd like to push patches 1+2 to -fixes and sort everything else later
in -next.  OK?

cheers,
  Gerd