lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf operations
Date

> -----Original Message-----
> From: intel-gvt-dev [mailto:intel-gvt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org] On
> Behalf Of Daniel Vetter
> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 4:39 PM
> To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
> Cc: Wang, Zhenyu Z <zhenyu.z.wang@intel.com>; intel-
> gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Chen, Xiaoguang
> <xiaoguang.chen@intel.com>; Zhang, Tina <tina.zhang@intel.com>; Alex
> Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>; Lv, Zhiyuan
> <zhiyuan.lv@intel.com>; Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>; intel-gvt-
> dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf
> operations
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 08:41:53AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > > Does gvt track the live cycle of all dma-bufs it has handed out?
> > >
> > > The V9 implementation does track the dma-bufs' live cycle. The
> > > original idea was that leaving the dma-bufs' live cycle management
> > > to user mode.
> >
> > That is still the case, user space decides which dma-bufs it'll go
> > keep cached. But kernel space can see what user space is doing, so
> > there is no need to explicitly tell the kernel whenever a cached
> > dma-buf exists or not.
>
> We do the same trick in drm_prime.c, keeping a cache of exported dma-buf
> around for re-exporting. Since for prime sharing the use-case is almost always
> re-importing as a drm gem buffer again we can then on re-import also tell
> userspace whether it already has that buffer in it's userspace buffer manager,
> but that's an additional optimization. With plain dma-buf we could achieve the
> same by wiring up a real stat() implementation with unique inode numbers (atm
> they all share the anon_inode singleton). But thus far no one asked for that.

Thanks. I'm going to submit the v10 version of ABI interface.

>
> btw I'm lost a bit in the discussion (was on vacation), but I think all the concerns
> I've noticed with the initial rfc have been raised already, so things look good. I'll
> check the next rfc once that shows up.
> -Daniel
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
> _______________________________________________
> intel-gvt-dev mailing list
> intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gvt-dev
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-04 02:47    [W:0.082 / U:2.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site