[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50BA3ACD.9080104@nvidia.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 19:13:49 +0200
From: Terje Bergström <tbergstrom@...dia.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
CC: "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/8] video: tegra: Add nvhost driver
On 01.12.2012 16:58, Thierry Reding wrote:
> I don't know where you see politics in what I said. All I'm saying is
> that we shouldn't be making things needlessly complex. In my experience
> the technically cleanest solution is usually the one with the least
> complexity.
Let me come up with a proposal and let's then see where to go next.
> But you already have extra code in the kernel to patch out expired sync-
> points. Is it really worth the added effort to burden userspace with
> this? If so I still think some kind of generic IOCTL to retrieve
> information about a syncpoint would be better than a sysfs interface.
That's exactly why I mentioned that it's not useful to upstream. There
are some cases where user space might want to check if a fence has
passed without waiting for it, but that's marginal and could be handled
even with waits with zero timeout.
Terje
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists