Re: [PATCH v10 0/3] Secure Memory Allocation Framework

From: John Einar Reitan
Date: Mon Oct 10 2016 - 09:01:33 EST

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 10:42:17AM -0400, Rob Clark wrote:
> probably should keep the discussion on github ( was updated a
> bit more and merged into so
> look there for the latest)..
> but briefly:
> 1) my expectation is if the user is implementing some use-case, it
> knows what devices and APIs are involved, otherwise it wouldn't be
> able to pass a buffer to that device/API..

As I described at Linaro Connect late-connected devices could cause new
constrains to appear. I.e. some (additonal) HDMI connection or WiFi Display etc.
Including all the might-happen devices might lead to unoptimal buffers
just to be able to handle some rarely-happen events.

I guess the easy resolve here is for the user to do a reallocation with
the new constraints added and replace the buffer(s) in question, but
with a slight lag in enabling the new device.