On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 09:16:02AM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > So this is fundamentaly different, fence as they are now allow random driver > > callback and this is bound to get ugly this is bound to lead to one driver > > doing something that seems innocuous but turn out to break heavoc when call > > from some other driver function. > > > tbh, that seems solvable by some strict rules about what you can do in > the callback.. ie. don't do anything you couldn't do in atomic, and > don't signal another fence.. off the top of my head that seems > sufficient. > > If the driver getting the callback needs to do more, then it can > always schedule a worker.. > > But I could certainly see the case where the driver waiting on fence > sets everything up before installing the cb and then just needs to > write one or a couple regs from the cb. Yes sane code will do sane things, sadly i fear we can not enforce sane code everywhere especialy with out of tree driver and i would rather force there hand to only allow sane implementation. Providing call back api obviously allows them to do crazy stuff. > > BR, > -R _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
