From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf operations
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 06:52:26 -0600
Message-ID: <20170616065226.59d80721@w520.home>
References: <1497513611-2814-1-git-send-email-xiaoguang.chen@intel.com>
        <1497513611-2814-6-git-send-email-xiaoguang.chen@intel.com>
        <f19da207-a7f5-d3d3-4577-b071e7d75cf7@nvidia.com>
        <1497542438.29252.1.camel@redhat.com>
        <20170615143833.7526351b@w520.home>
        <1497608682.30239.3.camel@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1497608682.30239.3.camel@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>, Xiaoguang Chen <xiaoguang.chen@intel.com>, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhenyuw@linux.intel.com, zhiyuan.lv@intel.com, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org, zhi.a.wang@intel.com, kevin.tian@intel.com
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:24:42 +0200
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> wrote:

>   Hi,
> 
> > I'm not sure I agree regarding the vgpu statement, maybe this is not
> > dmabuf specific, but what makes it vgpu specific?  We need to
> > separate
> > our current usage plans from what it's actually describing and I
> > don't
> > see that it describes anything vgpu specific.  
> 
> Well, it describes a framebuffer, what non-graphic device would need
> that?

Graphics is not necessarily vgpu though, which is my point.  It should
not be named after our intended use case (vgpu), it should be named
after what it's describing (a framebuffer, or graphics plane).  Thanks,

Alex