linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/83] AMD HSA kernel driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140716190232.GB31046@kroah.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:02:32 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc:	"Bridgman, John" <John.Bridgman@....com>,
	Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@...il.com>,
	"Lewycky, Andrew" <Andrew.Lewycky@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	"Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/83] AMD HSA kernel driver

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:21:14AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Bridgman, John <John.Bridgman@....com> wrote:
> [snip away the discussion about hsa device discover, I'm hijacking
> this thread just for the event/fence stuff here.]
> 
> > ... There's an event mechanism still to come - mostly for communicating fences and shader interrupts back to userspace, but also used for "device change" notifications, so no polling of sysfs.
> 
> That could would be interesting. On i915 my plan is to internally use
> the recently added struct fence from Maarten. For the external
> interface for userspace that wants explicit control over fences I'm
> leaning towards polishing the android syncpt stuff (currently in
> staging). But in any case I _really_ want to avoid that we end up with
> multiple different and incompatible explicit fencing interfaces on
> linux.

I agree, and I'll say it stronger than that, we WILL NOT have different
and incompatible fencing interfaces in the kernel.  That way lies
madness.

John, take a look at what is now in linux-next, it should provide what
you need here, right?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/