[Intel-gfx] [PATCH RFC 3/4] drm/i915: add SVM execbuf ioctl v10

Jesse Barnes jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org
Mon Aug 15 16:26:54 UTC 2016


On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 15:34 +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
> 
> > 
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:48:06PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> > > 
> > > From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org>
> > > 
> > > We just need to pass in an address to execute and some flags,
> > > since we
> > > don't have to worry about buffer relocation or any of the other
> > > usual
> > > stuff.  Returns a fence to be used for synchronization.
> > > 
> > > v2: add a request after batch submission (Jesse)
> > > v3: add a flag for fence creation (Chris)
> > > v4: add CLOEXEC flag (Kristian)
> > >     add non-RCS ring support (Jesse)
> > > v5: update for request alloc change (Jesse)
> > > v6: new sync file interface, error paths, request breadcrumbs
> > > v7: always CLOEXEC for sync_file_install
> > > v8: rebase on new sync file api
> > > v9: rework on top of fence requests and sync_file
> > > v10: take fence ref for sync_file (Chris)
> > >      use correct flush (Chris)
> > >      limit exec on rcs
> > 
> > This is incomplete, so just proof of principle?
> 
> At some point of rebasing I noticed that Jesse did limit
> everything on rcs. So I just put it back.
> 
> No idea yet why we would need to limit for rcs only.
> 

I went back and forth; I think I did test on the BLT ring and maybe one
of the video rings and things worked on at least one platform.  But I'm
still worried about bugs...

Jesse


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list