Hello, On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 10:54:34AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Anyway, I don't think reusing the drm_minor registration makes sense, > since we want to be on the drm_device, not on the minor. Which is a bit > awkward for cgroups, which wants to identify devices using major.minor > pairs. But I guess drm is the first subsystem where 1 device can be > exposed through multiple minors ... > > Tejun, any suggestions on this? I'm not extremely attached to maj:min. It's nice in that it'd be consistent with blkcg but it already isn't the nicest of identifiers for block devices. If using maj:min is reasonably straight forward for gpus even if not perfect, I'd prefer going with maj:min. Otherwise, please feel free to use the ID best for GPUs - hopefully something which is easy to understand, consistent with IDs used elsewhere and easy to build tooling around. Thanks. -- tejun
