On 2023-05-10 15:00:03, Teres Alexis, Alan Previn wrote:
>
> alan:snip
>
> > This is why I asked if it was it was "basically certain that in a
> > production environment, then it will eventually return 1 meaning it's
> > ready". Alan's response was a little ambiguous on this point.
> alan: if we get a '2' and never transition to '1' - thats a kernel bug or
> firmware / system issue.
>
> > Arguably a transition from 2 to -ENODEV could be considered a kernel
> > bug, but it doesn't sound like Alan would agree. :) Maybe Alan would
> > agree to saying it's either a kernel, or system integration bug.
> alan: agreed - that would be a kernel bug or a system integration bug.
>
> I also agreed on the init-flow vs app-usage thoughts Jordan had.
> That said MESA has many ways it can use this UAPI and we can discuss
> that on the MESA patch.
>
>
> hmmm.. so... ack anyone? [insert big hopeful smiley here]
> apologies if I am asking too often.
Assuming that:
2 = PXP feature is supported but should be ready soon (pending
initialization of non-i915 system dependencies).
really means, "it'll be ready soon or there is a bug somewhere",
Acked-by: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen@xxxxxxxxx>
If Mesa finds that it can't really rely on that, we may have to decide
on a different approach in how to use that return value.
Is it possible to hold on for another ~12 hours to see if Lionel wants
to Ack as well?
-Jordan
