Re: [PATCH v1 9/9] drivers: hv: dxgkrnl: Implement DXGSYNCFILE

[Daniel Vetter]

On Fri, Feb 04, 2022 at 04:35:55PM -0800, Iouri Tarassov wrote:
> 
> On 1/17/2022 1:35 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 9:34 AM Iouri Tarassov
> > <iourit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > btw another idea I had over the w/e: Another option might be to allow
> > different backends for sync_file, and then making sure that you cannot
> > ever mix dma_fence and hv_dxg_fence type sync_file up (in e.g. the
> > merge ioctl).
> > 
> > The issue is that fundamentally dma_fence and memory fences (or umf
> > for userspace memory fences as we tend to call them) aren't
> > compatible, but some of the interop plans we have is to allow stuffing
> > either of them into fence container objects like sync_file. So going
> > that route for wddm monitored fence support too could be a really
> > future-proof approach, plus it'd allow you to still share the
> > sync_file interface code. Not that it's going to be much code sharing,
> > since all the implementation code needs to be distinct.
> > -Daniel
> 
> Thanks Daniel!
> 
> I will remove the patch for dxgsyncfile from the next set of upstream
> patches.
> 
> It will be added later after a re-design.

Yeah sounds like a good plan forward to not hold up everything else
meanwhile.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch