On 2020.06.16 19:47:20 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Shaofeng Tang (2020-06-16 09:29:20) > > [Why] > > Query if vgpu is active, it is useful to the user. > > Currently, only the primary plane is usable when vgpu is active. > > The value of vgpu active is useful for user to determine > > how many planes can be used. also useful for user to > > determine different behaviors according to vgpu is active or not. > > The number of planes must be queried via kms, and all such kernel > capabilities should be declared via the appropriate interface. > > I am not saying that there is not potentially good reason to let the > user to know it's a virtual gpu, but hardcoding api limits in the client > based on the parameter is a bad idea. Yeah, as I replied for internal before, guest shouldn't detect via this kind of interface, which also doesn't reflect any gvt host capability change. For any current gap, let's fix gvt or vgpu handling instead. Thanks.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
