On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 06:13:52PM +0100, Robert Foss wrote: > Hey Gerd, > > On 2018-11-09 11:13, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 05:25:05PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: > > > On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 at 11:42, Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > When the execbuf call receives an in-fence it will get the dma_fence > > > > related to that fence fd and wait on it before submitting the draw call. > > > > > > > > On the out-fence side we get fence returned by the submitted draw call > > > > and attach it to a sync_file and send the sync_file fd to userspace. On > > > > error -1 is returned to userspace. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Suggested-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Changes since v3: > > > > - Move all in_fence handling to the same VIRTGPU_EXECBUF_FENCE_FD_IN block > > > Fwiw my suggestion was to explicitly document whether the IOCTL can > > > support, simultaneously, IN and OUT fence. > > > > Yes, that would be good. Code looks like it is supposed to work, but > > explicitly saying so in the commit message would be nice. > > On it! Will send out a v5. > > > > > Also: should we use separate fields for in/out fds? > > I'm not sure I understand which fields you're referring to. fence_in_fd & fence_out_fd in the ioctl struct (patch #2). cheers, Gerd _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
