[PATCH 3/3] virtio-gpu api: VIRTIO_GPU_F_RESSOURCE_V2
Gerd Hoffmann
kraxel at redhat.com
Wed Apr 17 09:57:50 UTC 2019
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 04:34:20PM -0700, Chia-I Wu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am still new to virgl, and missed the last round of discussion about
> resource_create_v2.
>
> From the discussion below, semantically resource_create_v2 creates a host
> resource object _without_ any storage; memory_create creates a host memory
> object which provides the storage. Is that correct?
Right now all resource_create_* variants create a resource object with
host storage. memory_create creates guest storage, and
resource_attach_memory binds things together. Then you have to transfer
the data.
Hmm, maybe we need a flag indicating that host storage is not needed,
for resources where we want establish some kind of shared mapping later
on.
> Do we expect these new commands to be supported by OpenGL, which does not
> separate resources and memories?
Well, for opengl you need a 1:1 relationship between memory region and
resource.
> > Yes, even though it is not clear yet how we are going to handle
> > host-allocated buffers in the vhost-user case ...
>
> This might be another dumb question, but is this only an issue for
> vhost-user(-gpu) case? What mechanisms are used to map host dma-buf into
> the guest address space?
qemu can change the address space, that includes mmap()ing stuff there.
An external vhost-user process can't do this, it can only read the
address space layout, and read/write from/to guest memory.
> But one needs to create the resource first to know which memory types can
> be attached to it. I think the metadata needs to be returned with
> resource_create_v2.
There is a resource_info reply for that.
> That should be good enough. But by returning alignments, we can minimize
> the gaps when attaching multiple resources, especially when the resources
> are only used by GPU.
We can add alignments to the resource_info reply.
cheers,
Gerd
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list