From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch, airlied@gmail.com,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH 3/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark DRM_VM_BIND as complete.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:30:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230829163005.54067-3-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230829163005.54067-1-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
The consensus is for individual drivers VM_BIND uapis with
the GPUVA helpers that are already implemented and merged
upstream.
The merged GPUVA documentation also establish some overall
rules for the locking to be followed by the drivers.
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
index bf60c5c82d0e..a115526c03e0 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
@@ -106,23 +106,6 @@ our tree. Missing Nouveau patches should *not* block Xe and any needed GPUVA
related patch should be independent and present on dri-devel or acked by
maintainers to go along with the first Xe pull request towards drm-next.
-DRM_VM_BIND
------------
-Nouveau, and Xe are all implementing ‘VM_BIND’ and new ‘Exec’ uAPIs in order to
-fulfill the needs of the modern uAPI. Xe merge should *not* be blocked on the
-development of a common new drm_infrastructure. However, the Xe team needs to
-engage with the community to explore the options of a common API.
-
-As a key measurable result, the DRM_VM_BIND needs to be documented in this file
-below, or this entire block deleted if the consensus is for independent drivers
-vm_bind ioctls.
-
-Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
-Xe merged, it is mandatory to enforce the overall locking scheme for all major
-structs and list (so vm and vma). So, a consensus is needed, and possibly some
-common helpers. If helpers are needed, they should be also documented in this
-document.
-
ASYNC VM_BIND
-------------
Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
@@ -230,3 +213,20 @@ Later, when we are in-tree, the goal is to collaborate with devcoredump
infrastructure with overall possible improvements, like multiple file support
for better organization of the dumps, snapshot support, dmesg extra print,
and whatever may make sense and help the overall infrastructure.
+
+DRM_VM_BIND
+-----------
+Nouveau, and Xe are all implementing ‘VM_BIND’ and new ‘Exec’ uAPIs in order to
+fulfill the needs of the modern uAPI. Xe merge should *not* be blocked on the
+development of a common new drm_infrastructure. However, the Xe team needs to
+engage with the community to explore the options of a common API.
+
+As a key measurable result, the DRM_VM_BIND needs to be documented in this file
+below, or this entire block deleted if the consensus is for independent drivers
+vm_bind ioctls.
+
+Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
+Xe merged, it is mandatory to enforce the overall locking scheme for all major
+structs and list (so vm and vma). So, a consensus is needed, and possibly some
+common helpers. If helpers are needed, they should be also documented in this
+document.
--
2.41.0
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark DRM_VM_BIND as complete.
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:30:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230829163005.54067-3-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230829163005.54067-1-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
The consensus is for individual drivers VM_BIND uapis with
the GPUVA helpers that are already implemented and merged
upstream.
The merged GPUVA documentation also establish some overall
rules for the locking to be followed by the drivers.
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
index bf60c5c82d0e..a115526c03e0 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/rfc/xe.rst
@@ -106,23 +106,6 @@ our tree. Missing Nouveau patches should *not* block Xe and any needed GPUVA
related patch should be independent and present on dri-devel or acked by
maintainers to go along with the first Xe pull request towards drm-next.
-DRM_VM_BIND
------------
-Nouveau, and Xe are all implementing ‘VM_BIND’ and new ‘Exec’ uAPIs in order to
-fulfill the needs of the modern uAPI. Xe merge should *not* be blocked on the
-development of a common new drm_infrastructure. However, the Xe team needs to
-engage with the community to explore the options of a common API.
-
-As a key measurable result, the DRM_VM_BIND needs to be documented in this file
-below, or this entire block deleted if the consensus is for independent drivers
-vm_bind ioctls.
-
-Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
-Xe merged, it is mandatory to enforce the overall locking scheme for all major
-structs and list (so vm and vma). So, a consensus is needed, and possibly some
-common helpers. If helpers are needed, they should be also documented in this
-document.
-
ASYNC VM_BIND
-------------
Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
@@ -230,3 +213,20 @@ Later, when we are in-tree, the goal is to collaborate with devcoredump
infrastructure with overall possible improvements, like multiple file support
for better organization of the dumps, snapshot support, dmesg extra print,
and whatever may make sense and help the overall infrastructure.
+
+DRM_VM_BIND
+-----------
+Nouveau, and Xe are all implementing ‘VM_BIND’ and new ‘Exec’ uAPIs in order to
+fulfill the needs of the modern uAPI. Xe merge should *not* be blocked on the
+development of a common new drm_infrastructure. However, the Xe team needs to
+engage with the community to explore the options of a common API.
+
+As a key measurable result, the DRM_VM_BIND needs to be documented in this file
+below, or this entire block deleted if the consensus is for independent drivers
+vm_bind ioctls.
+
+Although having a common DRM level IOCTL for VM_BIND is not a requirement to get
+Xe merged, it is mandatory to enforce the overall locking scheme for all major
+structs and list (so vm and vma). So, a consensus is needed, and possibly some
+common helpers. If helpers are needed, they should be also documented in this
+document.
--
2.41.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-29 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-29 16:30 [Intel-xe] [PATCH 1/4] drm/doc/rfc: No STAGING out of drivers/staging Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 2/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark Dev_coredump as completed Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2023-08-29 16:30 ` [PATCH 3/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark DRM_VM_BIND as complete Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:10 ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:10 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-04 21:32 ` [Intel-xe] " Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-04 21:32 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-06 17:57 ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-06 17:57 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 4/4] drm/doc/rfc: Mark GPU VA " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:30 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:17 ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:17 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-04 21:39 ` [Intel-xe] " Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-04 21:39 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-09-06 18:03 ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-06 18:03 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-29 16:44 ` [Intel-xe] ✗ CI.Patch_applied: failure for series starting with [1/4] drm/doc/rfc: No STAGING out of drivers/staging Patchwork
2023-08-29 17:35 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 1/4] " Lucas De Marchi
2023-08-29 17:35 ` Lucas De Marchi
2023-08-31 8:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2023-08-31 8:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2023-08-31 19:08 ` [Intel-xe] " Rodrigo Vivi
2023-08-31 19:08 ` Rodrigo Vivi
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=20230829163005.54067-3-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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.