From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E7EB4657C6; Mon, 18 May 2026 14:15:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779113738; cv=none; b=hHpmriD6JAxSbYCB4TaXFo3TfWQq+XvCgQ+PhyKBCGcqg8JdL+/3XLzqAjmfpXC4m37b0P1SmKh3ZLWEP4R6Y8BSn+cShKe9CgY83P+fxq6KkW0L3WApN5KKLP3SHnOTcZp5vlgs03PE5WIJM8OocdJTxzYhiXkl/fD4w1m/a+4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779113738; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QDhP2ywyXlpxq310WYLb3KtdttgJ/FJZ9LPyfSF/Qxk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VkXbWvlQZ16C16PPuf69HgRS0VoG9wuKzpo05c/SfQ1x4+/EeK8eOFNpTsDy95LAtZ0b+Z4V1UP+SVXnPuWMTxgadJ1Qits6hlytQb70k2VJeSmSN8nM/r8bPkYj7AybB6Djks1UkCfqITJBAaQyHwhbsrpvKXd/JwTuUGx6CBA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=MjR5dh6D; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="MjR5dh6D" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1779113735; bh=QDhP2ywyXlpxq310WYLb3KtdttgJ/FJZ9LPyfSF/Qxk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MjR5dh6DsJgL0f40EMCWwtquK5OJ/A/kVSwXGNDcgSomQblUUjk8ZTwjRW3ENLNrs aiJfPViRQVbayYcHJ5w6Z67KNWoebKyOi3echpl6ZFlozTqWd6xYAVsleIjLVVTXjf d45/S10lQa/h9nykuB1QorwzPVinCUd/10e0iG9fY0sZuMhu3nPtmU/AcTTpaMjv2E Bth3MqjjCZqzo3LzfKzg9sBu4eNgCPM4m+CY0tUPWW1EuwvqjeZrXWLJw2Y84ocqNe 3RdZvqYVsovVTElND8wBV8oVrhdqjGToQJErRh5s24fuPU6igUxKNAgTzfkrS3KO20 /E20WxyY+UuLg== Received: from fedora (unknown [100.64.0.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bbrezillon) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D05117E04E2; Mon, 18 May 2026 16:15:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 16:15:31 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Christian =?UTF-8?B?S8O2bmln?= Cc: Steven Price , Liviu Dudau , Sumit Semwal , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] dma-resv: Define guards for context-less dma_resv locks Message-ID: <20260518161531.331cab2d@fedora> In-Reply-To: References: <20260513-panthor-guard-refactor-v1-0-f2d8c15a97ce@collabora.com> <20260513-panthor-guard-refactor-v1-2-f2d8c15a97ce@collabora.com> <03a57011-e734-4a74-aef2-e3a6016e15fc@amd.com> <20260518111456.30ba9bba@fedora> Organization: Collabora X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 18 May 2026 14:18:41 +0200 Christian K=C3=B6nig wrote: > On 5/18/26 11:14, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > Hi Christian, > >=20 > > On Mon, 18 May 2026 09:10:23 +0200 > > Christian K=C3=B6nig wrote: > > =20 > >> On 5/13/26 18:58, Boris Brezillon wrote: =20 > >>> When used without a context, dma_resv are no different from regular > >>> locks. Define guards so we can use the guard-syntactic sugars for > >>> explicit/implicit scoped locks. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon =20 > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Christian K=C3=B6nig > >> > >> How do you want to upstream it? My preference would be drm-misc-next, = but I think I can live with a panthor specific branch as well. =20 > >=20 > > Everything Panthor related goes through drm-misc-next, so drm-misc-next > > also has my preference ;-). But I'd like to wait for more feedback on > > the other drm patches, and there are a few things I need to address in > > the panthor patches anyway, so it's likely to take a couple more weeks > > for this series to hit the drm-misc tree, unless you have a good reason > > to fast-track this specific patch. =20 >=20 > Well the DMA-buf code itself uses dma_resv_lock/unlock There's no use in dma-resv.c that can be converted to guards. I gave dma-buf.c a try, but just like for panthor, I don't really like the fact it's halfway through (other locks still use manual locking), so I'd be tempted to convert everything at once for consistency. If you're fine with that, I can give this a try. > and obviously has test cases for all the different variants. Looks like the test cases all validate that dma_resv_lock(x, NULL) returns 0. If I were to convert those to guard(dma_resv)(), these checks would be gone. Is that okay with you?