On Sunday, October 9th, 2022 at 20:00, Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Am 09.10.22 um 16:40 schrieb Simon Ser: > > > Introduce a new DRM_IOCTL_SYNCOBJ_TIMELINE_REGISTER_EVENTFD IOCTL > > which signals an eventfd when a timeline point completes. > > I was entertaining the same though for quite a while, but I would even > go a step further and actually always base the wait before signal > functionality of the drm_syncobj and the eventfd functionality. That > would save us quite a bit of complexity I think. Hm what do you mean exactly? I'm not sure I'm following. > As a general note I think the name > DRM_IOCTL_SYNCOBJ_TIMELINE_REGISTER_EVENTFD is just to long, just make > that DRM_IOCTL_SYNCOBJ_EVENTFD. Same for the function names as well. Agreed. > Additional to that I think we should also always have a graceful > handling for binary syncobjs. So please try to avoid making this special > for the timeline case (the timeline case should of course still be > supported). This makes sense to me.
