Christian König wrote:
Otherwise buffer placement is very restrictive and might fail.
Fixes: "drm/amdgpu: fix VCE buffer placement restrictions v2"
Signed-off-by: Christian König <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Deng, Emily <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vce.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vce.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vce.c
index 55a726a322e3..d274ae535530 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vce.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vce.c
@@ -585,8 +585,8 @@ static int amdgpu_vce_validate_bo(struct amdgpu_cs_parser
*p, uint32_t ib_idx,
for (i = 0; i < bo->placement.num_placement; ++i) {
bo->placements[i].fpfn = max(bo->placements[i].fpfn, fpfn);
- bo->placements[i].lpfn = bo->placements[i].fpfn ?
- min(bo->placements[i].fpfn, lpfn) : lpfn;
+ bo->placements[i].lpfn = bo->placements[i].lpfn ?
+ min(bo->placements[i].lpfn, lpfn) : lpfn;
}
return ttm_bo_validate(&bo->tbo, &bo->placement, &ctx);
}
This fixes VCE for me, also with this I can again test
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102296
which also seems good now. I'll close that after I am sure I am testing
correctly.
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
