On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 02:01:16PM -0500, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 1:56 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 01:16:04PM -0500, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:51 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > + ret = set_proto_ctx_param(file_priv, pc, args);
> > > >
> > > > I think we should have a FIXME here of not allowing this on some future
> > > > platforms because just use CTX_CREATE_EXT.
> > >
> > > Done.
> > >
> > > > > + if (ret == -ENOTSUPP) {
> > > > > + /* Some params, specifically SSEU, can only be set on fully
> > > >
> > > > I think this needs a FIXME: that this only holds during the conversion?
> > > > Otherwise we kinda have a bit a problem me thinks ...
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what you mean by that.
> >
> > Well I'm at least assuming that we wont have this case anymore, i.e.
> > there's only two kinds of parameters:
> > - those which are valid only on proto context
> > - those which are valid on both (like priority)
> >
> > This SSEU thing looks like a 3rd parameter, which is only valid on
> > finalized context. That feels all kinds of wrong. Will it stay? If yes
> > *ugh* and why?
>
> Because I was being lazy. The SSEU stuff is a fairly complex param to
> parse and it's always set live. I can factor out the SSEU parsing
> code if you want and it shouldn't be too bad in the end.
Yeah I think the special case here is a bit too jarring.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
