From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:52459 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751172AbeEDIXF (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2018 04:23:05 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id w194so2711462wmf.2 for ; Fri, 04 May 2018 01:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 10:23:01 +0200 From: Daniel Vetter To: Chris Wilson Cc: Daniel Vetter , DRI Development , Intel Graphics Development , Sumit Semwal , Gustavo Padovan , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] dma-fence: Make ->wait callback optional Message-ID: <20180504082301.GR12521@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <20180503142603.28513-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20180503142603.28513-5-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <152542135089.4767.3315686184618150713@mail.alporthouse.com> <20180504081722.GQ12521@phenom.ffwll.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180504081722.GQ12521@phenom.ffwll.local> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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