Am 17.07.2017 um 19:22 schrieb Marek Olšák: > On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I can take a look at it, I just won't have time until next week most likely. >> I've taken a look, and it's seemingly more complicated than I'm >> expecting I'd want to land in Mesa before 17.2 ships, I'd really >> prefer to just push the new libdrm_amdgpu api from this patch. If I >> have to port all the current radv code to the new API, I'll most >> definitely get something wrong. >> >> Adding the new API so far looks like >> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~airlied/drm/log/?h=drm-amdgpu-cs-submit-raw >> >> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~airlied/drm/commit/?h=drm-amdgpu-cs-submit-raw&id=e7f85d0ca617fa41e72624780c9035df132e23c4 >> being the API, and whether it should take a uint32_t context id or >> context handle left as an open question in the last patch in the >> series. >> >> However to hook this into radv or radeonsi will take a bit of >> rewriting of a lot of code that is probably a bit more fragile than >> I'd like for this sort of surgery at this point. >> >> I'd actually suspect if we do want to proceed with this type of >> interface, we might be better doing it all in common mesa code, and >> maybe bypassing libdrm_amdgpu altogether, which I suppose the API I've >> written here is mostly already doing. > Well, we plan to stop using the BO list ioctl. The interface has > bo_list_handle in it. Will we just set it to 0 when add the chunk for > the inlined buffer list i.e. what radeon has? Yeah, exactly that was my thinking as well. Christian. > Marek
