On 12.11.2017 13:23, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
On 11.11.2017 00:15, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
On 07.11.2017 18:29, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
On 07.11.2017 16:11, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
On 05.11.2017 19:14, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
On 05.11.2017 14:01, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
Add an option to host1x_channel_request to interruptibly wait for a
free channel. This allows IOCTLs that acquire a channel to block
the userspace.
Wouldn't it be more optimal to request channel and block after job's pining,
when all patching and checks are completed? Note that right now we have locking
around submission in DRM, which I suppose should go away by making locking fine
grained.
That would be possible, but I don't think it should matter much since contention
here should not be the common case.
Or maybe it would be more optimal to just iterate over channels, like I
suggested before [0]?
Somehow I hadn't noticed this before, but this would break the invariant of
having one client/class per channel.
Yes, currently there is a weak relation of channel and clients device, but seems
channels device is only used for printing dev_* messages and device could be
borrowed from the channels job. I don't see any real point of hardwiring channel
to a specific device or client.
Although, it won't work with syncpoint assignment to channel.
On the other hand.. it should work if one syncpoint could be assigned to
multiple channels, couldn't it?
A syncpoint can only be mapped to a single channel, so unfortunately
this won't work.
Mikko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
