[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5c0e9e01-cdfc-8915-3101-fdb4465077d0@daenzer.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:16:08 +0900
From: Michel Dänzer <michel@...nzer.net>
To: Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] drm: Add drm_object lease infrastructure
On 03/04/17 01:31 AM, Keith Packard wrote:
> Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch> writes:
>
>> I'm also not sure whether we really want sub-leases in v1, that's easy
>> to add later on, but for now just complicates stuff. Main compositor
>> should be a full master, VR can be the first lease level, we don't
>> need more I think for now?
>
> We've discussed how leases might be used to implement multi-user
> support, so offering sub-leases means that environment could also
> support leasing resources out from the users session.
>
> We also just don't know how useful it might be until we explore the
> space a bit more.
It should only be added upstream once it's clear that it's useful.
> Given that it takes years to get new features into distributions, I
> tend to error on the side of generality.
Why would it take years? Distros seem to generally use the latest
upstream kernel release available at release/freeze.
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (225 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists