From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>
To: Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>
Cc: daniels@collabora.com, greg@kroah.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Arve Hjønnevåg" <arve@android.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
"Riley Andrews" <riandrews@android.com>,
"Gustavo Padovan" <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk>,
"John Harrison" <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging/android: add TODO to de-stage android sync framework
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:32:52 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151124173252.GA14838@joana> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <565495AC.9050008@google.com>
2015-11-24 Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>:
> On 11/23/15 11:41 AM, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> >+ - remove sw_sync, it is used only for testing/debugging and should not be
> >+upstreamed.
> >+ - port sw_sync testcases to use debugfs somehow
>
> A quick but important nitpick:
>
> sw_sync itself is just an in-kernel helper for creating fences, when you
> don't have something like sync timeline primitives baked into your hardware.
>
> CONFIG_SW_SYNC_USER adds the interface for creating and signaling sw_sync
> objects from userspace. This is the part that's dangerous and only intended
> for testing, etc.
>
> AFAIK CONFIG_SW_SYNC_USER is the only part people have been objecting to.
> I'm fine with removing it. Removing the kernel-facing side of sw_sync would
> be a problem for us, since many drivers use it to create their fences.
Right, I probably misundertood things, I'm okay with removing only
CONFIG_SW_SYNC_USER and if others are okay too I'll just send an updated
patch for the TODO.
Gustavo
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>
To: Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>
Cc: greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, daniels@collabora.com,
"Gustavo Padovan" <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk>,
"Arve Hjønnevåg" <arve@android.com>,
"Riley Andrews" <riandrews@android.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
"Rob Clark" <robdclark@gmail.com>,
"John Harrison" <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging/android: add TODO to de-stage android sync framework
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 15:32:52 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151124173252.GA14838@joana> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <565495AC.9050008@google.com>
2015-11-24 Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>:
> On 11/23/15 11:41 AM, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> >+ - remove sw_sync, it is used only for testing/debugging and should not be
> >+upstreamed.
> >+ - port sw_sync testcases to use debugfs somehow
>
> A quick but important nitpick:
>
> sw_sync itself is just an in-kernel helper for creating fences, when you
> don't have something like sync timeline primitives baked into your hardware.
>
> CONFIG_SW_SYNC_USER adds the interface for creating and signaling sw_sync
> objects from userspace. This is the part that's dangerous and only intended
> for testing, etc.
>
> AFAIK CONFIG_SW_SYNC_USER is the only part people have been objecting to.
> I'm fine with removing it. Removing the kernel-facing side of sw_sync would
> be a problem for us, since many drivers use it to create their fences.
Right, I probably misundertood things, I'm okay with removing only
CONFIG_SW_SYNC_USER and if others are okay too I'll just send an updated
patch for the TODO.
Gustavo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-24 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-23 19:41 [PATCH] staging/android: add TODO to de-stage android sync framework Gustavo Padovan
2015-11-23 19:41 ` Gustavo Padovan
2015-11-24 8:51 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-24 8:53 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-24 8:53 ` Daniel Vetter
2015-11-24 17:28 ` Greg Hackmann
2015-11-24 17:28 ` Greg Hackmann
2015-11-24 16:51 ` Greg Hackmann
2015-11-24 16:51 ` Greg Hackmann
2015-11-24 17:32 ` Gustavo Padovan [this message]
2015-11-24 17:32 ` Gustavo Padovan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151124173252.GA14838@joana \
--to=gustavo@padovan.org \
--cc=John.C.Harrison@Intel.com \
--cc=arve@android.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniels@collabora.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ghackmann@google.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riandrews@android.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.