[Intel-gfx] Time for execbuf3 ?

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2019-03-22 11:36:35)
> On 21/03/2019 14:15, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2019-03-21 14:08:39)
> >> Mostly it's just about having the ability to extend it.
> >> I can't really tell you up front what we're going to need until we do :)
> > Yup. My takeaway is that the uAPI debugability is something that has
> > never been taken seriously (-EINVAL!). And that if we are going to design
> > an asynchronous interface with variable command packets, then we need a
> > better means for userspace to see which command went wrong and why. For
> > that, I think attaching a tracek ringbuf to the interface would be ideal.
> >
> > Unless I can sell you on a validation layer in userspace :)
> 
> 
> On the debugability side, I could be happy with being able to compile 
> the submission part of i915 with Eric's new project : 
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/anholt/drm-shim

Cool, I was thinking of something like "if we could recompile the kernel
validation logic in userspace that would avoid having to add a lot of
debug messages to the kernel". But I didn't realise that drm-shim could
help, ta.
 
> Having another repository/codebase just for validation seems like more 
> work, easily going out of sync with what's in i915.

Agreed.
-Chris