Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] drm/i915/gvt: support QEMU getting the dmabuf

[Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>]

  Hi,

> > >>Hmm, that looks like a rather strange way to return a file descriptor.
> > >>
> > >>What is the reason to not use ioctls on the vfio file handle, like
> > >>older version of these patches did?  
> > >If I understood correctly that Alex prefer not to change the ioctls on the vfio file
> > >handle like the old version.
> > >So I used this way the smallest change to general vfio framework only adding a
> > >subregion definition.
> 
> I think I was hoping we could avoid a separate file descriptor
> altogether and use a vfio region instead.

What exactly did you have in mind?  Put the framebuffer information
(struct intel_vgpu_dmabuf) into the vfio region, then access it using
read/write/mmap?

> However, it was explained
> previously why this really needs to be a separate fd and I agree that
> using a region to expose an fd is really awkward.

Now with this patchset we have *two* kinds of separate file handles.
First the anon-fd created by reading from the region.  This is then used
to run the intel ioctls on, which in turn create the other kind of file
handle (dma-buf-fd).

The dma-buf-fd really needs to be a separate fd, because it gets passed
around as handle and because this is the way dma-bufs work (guess this
is the discussion you are referring to).

I can't see a compelling reason for the anon-fd though.  I suspect this
was done due to a misunderstanding ...

cheers,
  Gerd

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx