From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] dma-fence: Make ->wait callback optional
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:23:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180504082301.GR12521@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180504081722.GQ12521@phenom.ffwll.local>
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 10:17:22AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 09:09:10AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2018-05-03 15:25:52)
> > > Almost everyone uses dma_fence_default_wait.
> > >
> > > v2: Also remove the BUG_ON(!ops->wait) (Chris).
> >
> > I just don't get the rationale for implicit over explicit.
>
> Closer approximation of dwim semantics. There's been tons of patch series
> all over drm and related places to get there, once we have a big pile of
> implementations and know what the dwim semantics should be. Individually
> they're all not much, in aggregate they substantially simplify simple
> drivers.
I also think clearer separation between optional optimization hooks and
mandatory core parts is useful in itself.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-04 8:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20180503142603.28513-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
2018-05-03 14:25 ` [PATCH 02/15] dma-fence: Make ->enable_signaling optional Daniel Vetter
2018-05-03 15:51 ` Chris Wilson
2018-05-04 14:10 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2018-05-07 9:35 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-05-03 14:25 ` [PATCH 03/15] dma-fence: Allow wait_any_timeout for all fences Daniel Vetter
2018-05-03 14:25 ` [PATCH 04/15] dma-fence: Make ->wait callback optional Daniel Vetter
2018-05-04 8:09 ` Chris Wilson
2018-05-04 8:17 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-05-04 8:23 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
[not found] ` <152542269311.4767.4254637128660397977@mail.alporthouse.com>
2018-05-04 8:57 ` Daniel Vetter
[not found] ` <152542538170.4767.9925437389288286145@mail.alporthouse.com>
2018-05-04 9:25 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-05-04 13:17 ` Christian König
2018-05-04 13:47 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-07-02 8:23 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-07-02 8:49 ` Christian König
2018-05-03 14:26 ` [PATCH 15/15] dma-fence: Polish kernel-doc for dma-fence.c Daniel Vetter
2018-05-04 14:06 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
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=20180504082301.GR12521@phenom.ffwll.local \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gustavo@padovan.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox