On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 2:32 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 12:23 AM Jason Ekstrand <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 4:12 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:26:42AM -0500, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > > > +static int set_proto_ctx_engines(struct drm_i915_file_private *fpriv, > > > > + struct i915_gem_proto_context *pc, > > > > + const struct drm_i915_gem_context_param *args) > > > > +{ > > > > + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = fpriv->dev_priv; > > > > + struct set_proto_ctx_engines set = { .i915 = i915 }; > > > > + struct i915_context_param_engines __user *user = > > > > + u64_to_user_ptr(args->value); > > > > + unsigned int n; > > > > + u64 extensions; > > > > + int err; > > > > + > > > > + if (!args->size) { > > > > + proto_context_free_user_engines(pc); > > > > + memset(&pc->legacy_rcs_sseu, 0, sizeof(pc->legacy_rcs_sseu)); > > > > > > Hm I wonder whether we shouldn't put this into the cleanup helper, and > > > then maybe call it proto_context_reset_user_engines()? I think that makes > > > the entire user engines vs sseu flow a notch clearer again. > > > > I fought with myself over this. The other two callers of > > free_user_engines() would be fine with clearing out the SSEU as well, > > I think, but neither of them need it. I erred on the side of putting > > it in the one place it's actually needed to make it clear what's going > > on here. I can move it if you'd like. > > So I'm wondering about semantics here a bit, and whether this is all > real, as in, used in real userspace: > > Instead of resetting engines here, shouldn't we just complain if > there's more than one engines_set command, ever, on a context? I don't think it's ever used. Let's kill it. > > As a bit of a P.S., I really hate the SSEU handling. It's horrible. > > If I had it to do all over again, SSEU would be a purly dynamic > > context param that you aren't allowed to set at create time. But, > > sadly, we're in the mess we're in. :-( > > Yeah it's rather annoying. If we go with "only one engines_set per ctx > create", then maybe we could streamline the SSEU stuff some more too? It certainly gets rid of this weird corner. --Jason _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx