All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frank Binns <frank.binns@imgtec.com>
To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: marcheu@google.com, Chiawen.Lee@mediatek.com, piman@google.com,
	scott.chuang@mediatek.com, dbehr@google.com,
	cawa.cheng@mediatek.com, katierh@google.com,
	Yt.Shen@mediatek.com, "Rufus Hamade" <rufus.hamade@imgtec.com>,
	djkurtz@google.com,
	"\"Nathan Chung (仲崇寧)\"" <nathan.chung@mediatek.com>,
	alberto@google.com, eddie.huang@mediatek.com
Subject: RFC on upstreaming of a Mediatek DRM modesetting driver
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 10:01:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <547C3C81.4010804@imgtec.com> (raw)

Hi,

We are currently in negotiations with one of our customers (Mediatek) on a strategy that will allow them to push a DRM modesetting driver into the upstream kernel. We are writing to get people's opinions and feedback on our proposed approach.

Currently, our driver is structured in such a way that the display driver is more tightly integrated with the GPU driver than we would like. Although our kernel driver has been shipped with a GPL license for a long time, it is not in a form that would be considered acceptable upstream. Unfortunately, it is going to be a long process to get this part of the driver into a reasonable state. However, in the meantime, we don't want to prevent customer portions of the driver from being upstreamed. With the work done on recent kernels, and with a willing partner in Mediatek, we now think that we can restructure our driver in such a way as to allow this to happen.

We see two basic approaches to achieving this:
1) Two independent DRM drivers, i.e. modesetting and render node drivers
2) A single componentised DRM driver

Our (IMG's) preferred approach is to have a single componentised DRM driver. This is due to the following reasons:

- Existing user space is not fully prepared to handle render nodes.

- There is concern that any IMG DRM render node driver will need knowledge about multiple SoCs, each one being from a different vendor. Would this be deemed acceptable?

- There is a trend, at least for DRM SoC drivers, towards using the component interface. Although there appears to be very few (one?) examples of GPU component drivers.

To give some high level details on how we expect the componentised DRM driver model to work, each vendor (in this case Mediatek) will write their own DRM driver (supporting modesetting, dumb buffers, GEM, prime, etc) and IMG will provide an almost entirely independent component driver that adds in GPU support. Until our GPU driver is in a suitable
state this will most likely necessitate a small kernel patch to wire up support, e.g. GPU specific ioctls.

Cross-device and cross-process memory allocations will be made using the DRM driver. In order for this memory to be shared with the GPU component driver it will be necessary, at least for the time being, to export it via prime and import it via a GPU ioctl. Synchronisation between the display and GPU will be performed via reservation objects.

Does this sound like a sane approach? Questions and/or feedback is very welcome.

Thanks
Frank 

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

             reply	other threads:[~2014-12-01 10:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-01 10:01 Frank Binns [this message]
2014-12-01 15:28 ` RFC on upstreaming of a Mediatek DRM modesetting driver Daniel Vetter
2014-12-01 15:31   ` Alberto Martin
2014-12-02  9:21   ` Frank Binns
2014-12-02 15:10     ` Daniel Vetter
2014-12-02 20:28       ` Thierry Reding
2014-12-01 15:32 ` Jerome Glisse
2014-12-01 16:20 ` Rob Clark

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=547C3C81.4010804@imgtec.com \
    --to=frank.binns@imgtec.com \
    --cc=Chiawen.Lee@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Yt.Shen@mediatek.com \
    --cc=alberto@google.com \
    --cc=cawa.cheng@mediatek.com \
    --cc=dbehr@google.com \
    --cc=djkurtz@google.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=eddie.huang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=katierh@google.com \
    --cc=marcheu@google.com \
    --cc=nathan.chung@mediatek.com \
    --cc=piman@google.com \
    --cc=rufus.hamade@imgtec.com \
    --cc=scott.chuang@mediatek.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.