From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5FDC18E5A for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 09:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 126E2208C3 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 09:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="lb76EOjr" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726518AbgCIJIG (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2020 05:08:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-f44.google.com ([209.85.216.44]:55157 "EHLO mail-pj1-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726360AbgCIJIG (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2020 05:08:06 -0400 Received: by mail-pj1-f44.google.com with SMTP id np16so4088163pjb.4 for ; Mon, 09 Mar 2020 02:08:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Zn5cohc9+dV+bc+jr0Y3IxVaSp3atkPAhci1ZiQCOiE=; b=lb76EOjrQJ2kmq2xRlbXLyDCaHjzcbZRLgkdY5Gnb4qTOS++wMphzDSsoXFT5w+EFT Uz+HZ10OCpASqR6vDFKkpvPRUsfD3TaSSpkbl2KX/Sbifvg9Yrfc4uP6qqexi8OB8obE FArxbS5v3MTQCSAO6tQIHpfrO3Hicd4Kw4FoA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Zn5cohc9+dV+bc+jr0Y3IxVaSp3atkPAhci1ZiQCOiE=; b=cuPqhBhqIDawijQvj9iodBBcikpTHVk05UGRtu5Q+T91ks8/Ox4FWWJK23kRf/lMJI E7J5y0+achep3B1zP3X2sByWLohWgr/lpKfFYg1fX5O/1YPDpjluOrIg9Qb1qRwwiNff ucmR4NpVpvI3KZpW6D7s3ElelIvFqw1t1Tk6SPH8MExKqm78gbJ4rAABQl7wmB5DE+92 75aSZVnrnykGkmG1CWKVCt+7cyUcLMtQpnDmw9+0g+QH/zHvVGBlSrC9JEgsf9ly3Evh LUsx3CzJXojZBEnIUZJBmdlAzbuHHRN6HCi8TNg6ZNZoO67+KMwWhXunziWQ3bFpSyly yxuQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1uDWoTXy7NaZJOVssjJdmXE8v22Gr+0LWo7+rVzOutIZsVAuqy z4ZNqZiNR/Q4QNWn9Qt1PS+8/Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vv0zF7N2cmYA5X/gp1rv27g/hBfgjCfbp21zaZtDnFG9hJlIvEUCyJpYWMqejwNtOCrkdPgwA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:5d88:: with SMTP id t8mr17937901pji.120.1583744885055; Mon, 09 Mar 2020 02:08:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2401:fa00:8f:203:5bbb:c872:f2b1:f53b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e3sm12252590pgm.15.2020.03.09.02.08.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 Mar 2020 02:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 18:08:02 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Tomasz Figa Cc: Hans Verkuil , Sergey Senozhatsky , Hans Verkuil , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Kyungmin Park , Marek Szyprowski , Sakari Ailus , Laurent Pinchart , Pawel Osciak , Linux Media Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 01/11] videobuf2: add cache management members Message-ID: <20200309090802.GA231920@google.com> References: <17060663-9c30-de5e-da58-0c847b93e4d3@xs4all.nl> <20200307094634.GB29464@google.com> <6f5916dd-63f6-5d19-13f4-edd523205a1f@xs4all.nl> <20200307112838.GA125961@google.com> <20200309032707.GA9460@google.com> <40cd09d9-49a6-2159-3c50-825732151221@xs4all.nl> <20200309072526.GC46830@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org On (20/03/09 17:58), Tomasz Figa wrote: [..] > > > I see. Hmm, how do I do "test that V4L2_BUF_CAP_SUPPORTS_CACHE_HINTS > > > is never set" then? > > > > Not sure I understand your question. When requesting buffers for non-MMAP memory, > > this capability must never be returned. That has nothing to do with a cache_hints > > module option. > > Have we decided that we explicitly don't want to support this for > USERPTR memory, even though technically possible and without much > extra code needed? My irrelevant 5 cents (sorry), I'd probably prefer to land MMAP first + test drivers patches + v4l-util patches. The effort required to land this is getting bigger. -ss