On 3/7/23 21:25, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> Not really a problem with this patchset, but having such branches looks >> like a bug in the driver's GEM design. Whatever your GEM object needs or >> does, it should be hidden in the implementation. Why is virtio doing this? > There is another "VRAM" VirtIO-GPU BO type that doesn't implement the > pin/unpin callbacks. Perhaps another option was to add the callbacks. Although, the pin/unpin are optional. So yes, there was no need for the extra branch, good catch. -- Best regards, Dmitry
