From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>
To: "Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>
Cc: "Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Boris Brezillon" <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
"Tvrtko Ursulin" <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com>,
"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Philipp Stanner" <phasta@kernel.org>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Sami Tolvanen" <samitolvanen@google.com>,
"Jeffrey Vander Stoep" <jeffv@google.com>,
"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"Daniel Stone" <daniels@collabora.com>,
"Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
shashanks@nvidia.com, jajones@nvidia.com,
"Eliot Courtney" <ecourtney@nvidia.com>,
"Joel Fernandes" <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
rust-for-linux <rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] drm/dep: Add DRM dependency queue layer
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:33:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DH54QCVVTUZD.3L5VPUW8B38V5@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <974E3052-FCA8-4985-A37D-A1F49C06A77C@collabora.com>
On Tue Mar 17, 2026 at 3:25 PM CET, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>
>
>> On 17 Mar 2026, at 09:31, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue Mar 17, 2026 at 3:47 AM CET, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>>> I agree with what Danilo said below, i.e.: IMHO, with the direction that DRM
>>> is going, it is much more ergonomic to add a Rust component with a nice C
>>> interface than doing it the other way around.
>>
>> This is not exactly what I said. I was talking about the maintainance aspects
>> and that a Rust Jobqueue implementation (for the reasons explained in my initial
>> reply) is easily justifiable in this aspect, whereas another C implementation,
>> that does *not* replace the existing DRM scheduler entirely, is much harder to
>> justify from a maintainance perspective.
>
> Ok, I misunderstood your point a bit.
>
>>
>> I'm also not sure whether a C interface from the Rust side is easy to establish.
>> We don't want to limit ourselves in terms of language capabilities for this and
>> passing through all the additional infromation Rust carries in the type system
>> might not be straight forward.
>>
>> It would be an experiment, and it was one of the ideas behind the Rust Jobqueue
>> to see how it turns if we try. Always with the fallback of having C
>> infrastructure as an alternative when it doesn't work out well.
>
> From previous experience in doing Rust to C FFI in NVK, I don’t see, at
> first, why this can’t work. But I agree with you, there may very well be
> unanticipated things here and this part is indeed an experiment. No argument
> from me here.
>
>>
>> Having this said, I don't see an issue with the drm_dep thing going forward if
>> there is a path to replacing DRM sched entirely.
>
> The issues I pointed out remain. Even if the plan is to have drm_dep + JobQueue
> (and no drm_sched). I feel that my point of considering doing it in Rust remains.
I mean, as mentioned below, we should have a Rust Jobqueue as independent
component. Or are you saying you'd consdider having only a Rust component with a
C API eventually? If so, that'd be way too early to consider for various
reasons.
>> The Rust component should remain independent from this for the reasons mentioned
>> in [1].
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/DH51W6XRQXYX.3M30IRYIWZLFG@kernel.org/
>
> Ok
>
> — Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-17 14:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-16 4:32 [RFC PATCH 00/12] Introduce DRM dep queue Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] workqueue: Add interface to teach lockdep to warn on reclaim violations Matthew Brost
2026-03-25 15:59 ` Tejun Heo
2026-03-26 1:49 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-26 2:19 ` Tejun Heo
2026-03-27 4:33 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-27 17:25 ` Tejun Heo
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] drm/dep: Add DRM dependency queue layer Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 9:16 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-17 5:22 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 8:48 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-16 10:25 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-17 5:10 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 12:19 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-18 23:02 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 2:47 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 5:45 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 7:17 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-03-17 8:26 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 12:04 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 19:41 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-03-23 17:31 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 17:42 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-03-17 18:14 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 19:48 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 20:43 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-18 22:40 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-19 9:57 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-22 6:43 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 7:58 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 10:06 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-23 17:11 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 12:31 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-17 14:25 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 14:33 ` Danilo Krummrich [this message]
2026-03-18 22:50 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 8:47 ` Christian König
2026-03-17 14:55 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-18 23:28 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-19 9:11 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-23 4:50 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 9:55 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-23 17:08 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 18:38 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-24 9:23 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-24 16:06 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-25 2:33 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-24 8:49 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-24 16:51 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 16:30 ` Shashank Sharma
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] drm/xe: Use WQ_MEM_WARN_ON_RECLAIM on all workqueues in the reclaim path Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] drm/xe: Issue GGTT invalidation under lock in ggtt_node_remove Matthew Brost
2026-03-26 5:45 ` Bhadane, Dnyaneshwar
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] drm/xe: Return fence from xe_sched_job_arm and adjust job references Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] drm/xe: Convert to DRM dep queue scheduler layer Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] drm/xe: Make scheduler message lock IRQ-safe Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] drm/xe: Rework exec queue object on top of DRM dep Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] drm/xe: Enable IRQ job put in " Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] drm/xe: Use DRM dep queue kill semantics Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] accel/amdxdna: Convert to drm_dep scheduler layer Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] drm/panthor: " Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:52 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Introduce DRM dep queue Patchwork
2026-03-16 4:53 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2026-03-16 5:28 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-03-16 8:09 ` ✗ Xe.CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
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=DH54QCVVTUZD.3L5VPUW8B38V5@kernel.org \
--to=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=daniel.almeida@collabora.com \
--cc=daniels@collabora.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ecourtney@nvidia.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jajones@nvidia.com \
--cc=jeffv@google.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=phasta@kernel.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=shashanks@nvidia.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
/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.