From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Widawsky <widawsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] drm/i915: context support unit test
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:21:52 -0800
Message-ID: <20110104202152.GA3838@snipes.kumite>
References: <20101225225303.GA5311@snipes.kumite>
	<20101228223616.GB5596@viiv.ffwll.ch>
	<20101229040301.GA17502@snipes.kumite>
	<5df004b018c6d26ee6c55171892e3e84.squirrel@www.ffwll.ch>
	<b9dded$hh2bn6@orsmga002.jf.intel.com>
	<e422031f05cf8e51af8ab1f9153cc3d0.squirrel@www.ffwll.ch>
	<20101230202118.GA4813@snipes.kumite>
	<20101231004831.GA14664@snipes.kumite>
	<0d30dc$kk5sgj@orsmga001.jf.intel.com>
	<20110104201004.GA3519@viiv.ffwll.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-iw0-f177.google.com (mail-iw0-f177.google.com
	[209.85.214.177])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 109BF9E70A
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue,  4 Jan 2011 12:21:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iwn38 with SMTP id 38so15720699iwn.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue, 04 Jan 2011 12:21:59 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110104201004.GA3519@viiv.ffwll.ch>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: benjamin.widawsky@linux.intel.com, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 09:10:04PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 09:31:23AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > I'm still leaning towards explicit associate/disassociate ioctls as I
> > think that will lead to a simpler userspace API (or at least integrate
> > conveniently with the existing libdrm).
> 
> I don't like a separate ioctl to associate/disassociate a buffer from a
> context: Conceptually there's no way to change that association without an
> execbuf call. Doing the book-keeping as a separate, non-atomic ioctl calls
> calls for trouble imho.
> 

I think there is a distinct possibility that we'll need a way to
associate buffers with either the GGTT or the ppGTT. I'm currently
trying to figure out if this is actually the case but I haven't yet been
able to find exactly which memory objects, if any, must be accessed
through the GGTT.

Just curious Daniel, if this is the case, does it change your feeling
on the IOCTL, or do you still prefer execbuf?

Ben