From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>
To: "Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>
Cc: "Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Boris Brezillon" <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
"Tvrtko Ursulin" <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com>,
"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Philipp Stanner" <phasta@kernel.org>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Sami Tolvanen" <samitolvanen@google.com>,
"Jeffrey Vander Stoep" <jeffv@google.com>,
"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"Daniel Stone" <daniels@collabora.com>,
"Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
shashanks@nvidia.com, jajones@nvidia.com,
"Eliot Courtney" <ecourtney@nvidia.com>,
"Joel Fernandes" <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
rust-for-linux <rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] drm/dep: Add DRM dependency queue layer
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:33:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DH54QCVVTUZD.3L5VPUW8B38V5@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <974E3052-FCA8-4985-A37D-A1F49C06A77C@collabora.com>
On Tue Mar 17, 2026 at 3:25 PM CET, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>
>
>> On 17 Mar 2026, at 09:31, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue Mar 17, 2026 at 3:47 AM CET, Daniel Almeida wrote:
>>> I agree with what Danilo said below, i.e.: IMHO, with the direction that DRM
>>> is going, it is much more ergonomic to add a Rust component with a nice C
>>> interface than doing it the other way around.
>>
>> This is not exactly what I said. I was talking about the maintainance aspects
>> and that a Rust Jobqueue implementation (for the reasons explained in my initial
>> reply) is easily justifiable in this aspect, whereas another C implementation,
>> that does *not* replace the existing DRM scheduler entirely, is much harder to
>> justify from a maintainance perspective.
>
> Ok, I misunderstood your point a bit.
>
>>
>> I'm also not sure whether a C interface from the Rust side is easy to establish.
>> We don't want to limit ourselves in terms of language capabilities for this and
>> passing through all the additional infromation Rust carries in the type system
>> might not be straight forward.
>>
>> It would be an experiment, and it was one of the ideas behind the Rust Jobqueue
>> to see how it turns if we try. Always with the fallback of having C
>> infrastructure as an alternative when it doesn't work out well.
>
> From previous experience in doing Rust to C FFI in NVK, I don’t see, at
> first, why this can’t work. But I agree with you, there may very well be
> unanticipated things here and this part is indeed an experiment. No argument
> from me here.
>
>>
>> Having this said, I don't see an issue with the drm_dep thing going forward if
>> there is a path to replacing DRM sched entirely.
>
> The issues I pointed out remain. Even if the plan is to have drm_dep + JobQueue
> (and no drm_sched). I feel that my point of considering doing it in Rust remains.
I mean, as mentioned below, we should have a Rust Jobqueue as independent
component. Or are you saying you'd consdider having only a Rust component with a
C API eventually? If so, that'd be way too early to consider for various
reasons.
>> The Rust component should remain independent from this for the reasons mentioned
>> in [1].
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/DH51W6XRQXYX.3M30IRYIWZLFG@kernel.org/
>
> Ok
>
> — Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-17 14:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20260316043255.226352-1-matthew.brost@intel.com>
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] workqueue: Add interface to teach lockdep to warn on reclaim violations Matthew Brost
2026-03-25 15:59 ` Tejun Heo
2026-03-26 1:49 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-26 2:19 ` Tejun Heo
2026-03-27 4:33 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-27 17:25 ` Tejun Heo
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] drm/dep: Add DRM dependency queue layer Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 9:16 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-17 5:22 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 8:48 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-16 10:25 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-17 5:10 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 12:19 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-18 23:02 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 2:47 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 5:45 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 7:17 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-03-17 8:26 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 12:04 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 19:41 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-03-23 17:31 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 17:42 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-03-17 18:14 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 19:48 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 20:43 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-18 22:40 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-19 9:57 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-22 6:43 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 7:58 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 10:06 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-23 17:11 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 12:31 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-17 14:25 ` Daniel Almeida
2026-03-17 14:33 ` Danilo Krummrich [this message]
2026-03-18 22:50 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 8:47 ` Christian König
2026-03-17 14:55 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-18 23:28 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-19 9:11 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-23 4:50 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 9:55 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-23 17:08 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-23 18:38 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-24 9:23 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-24 16:06 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-25 2:33 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-24 8:49 ` Boris Brezillon
2026-03-24 16:51 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-17 16:30 ` Shashank Sharma
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] accel/amdxdna: Convert to drm_dep scheduler layer Matthew Brost
2026-03-16 4:32 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] drm/panthor: " Matthew Brost
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=DH54QCVVTUZD.3L5VPUW8B38V5@kernel.org \
--to=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=daniel.almeida@collabora.com \
--cc=daniels@collabora.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ecourtney@nvidia.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jajones@nvidia.com \
--cc=jeffv@google.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=phasta@kernel.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=shashanks@nvidia.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
/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