On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:04:57AM -0800, Robert Morell wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 01:10:04AM -0800, Semwal, Sumit wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Robert Morell <rmorell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is intended to be used for "an internal implementation > > > issue, and not really an interface". The dma-buf infrastructure is > > > explicitly intended as an interface between modules/drivers, so it > > > should use EXPORT_SYMBOL instead. > > > > + Konrad, Arnd, Mauro: there were strong objections on using > > EXPORT_SYMBOL in place of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL by all 3 of them; I I am going to defer to what David Airlie recommends. > > suggest we first arrive at a consensus before merging this patch. > > This discussion seems to have stagnated; how do we move forward here? > > Sumit, as the primary author and new maintainer (congrats!) of the > dma-buf infrastructure, it seems like it's really your call how to > proceed. I'd still like to see this be something that we can use from > the nvidia and fglrx drivers for Xorg buffer sharing, as I and Dave have > argued in this thread. It really seems to me that this change on a > technical level won't have any adverse effect on the scenarios where it > can be used today, but it will allow it to be used more widely, which > will prevent duplication and fragmentation in the future and be greatly > appreciated by users of hardware such as Optimus. > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > Thanks, > Robert _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
