On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 02:35:19PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > On 14 July 2014 18:37, Christian König <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I vote for HSA module that expose ioctl and is an intermediary with the > >> kernel driver that handle the hardware. This gives a single point for > >> HSA hardware and yes this enforce things for any hardware manufacturer. > >> I am more than happy to tell them that this is it and nothing else if > >> they want to get upstream. > > > > I think we should still discuss this single point of entry a bit more. > > > > Just to make it clear the plan is to expose all physical HSA capable devices > > through a single /dev/hsa device node to userspace. > > This is why we don't design kernel interfaces in secret foundations, > and expect anyone to like them. > I think at this time this is unlikely to get into 3.17. But Christian had point on having multiple device file. So something like /dev/hsa/* > So before we go any further, how is this stuff planned to work for > multiple GPUs/accelerators? My understanding is that you create queue and each queue is associated with a device. You can create several queue for same device and have different priority btw queue. Btw queue here means a ring buffer that understand a common set of pm4 packet. > Do we have a userspace to exercise this interface so we can see how > such a thing would look? I think we need to wait a bit before freezing and accepting the kernel api and see enough userspace bits to be confortable. Moreover if AMD wants common API for HSA i also think that they at very least needs there HSA partner to make public comment on the kernel API. Cheers, Jérôme _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
