linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v10] vfio: ABI for mdev display dma-buf operation

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date:   Wed, 12 Jul 2017 02:31:40 +0000
From:   "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@...el.com>
To:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
CC:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        "zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com" <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>,
        "chris@...is-wilson.co.uk" <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
        Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
        "Lv, Zhiyuan" <zhiyuan.lv@...el.com>,
        "intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org" 
        <intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v10] vfio: ABI for mdev display dma-buf operation


> -----Original Message-----
> From: intel-gvt-dev [mailto:intel-gvt-dev-bounces@...ts.freedesktop.org] On
> Behalf Of Daniel Vetter
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:13 PM
> To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
> Cc: Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@...el.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; intel-
> gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org; alex.williamson@...hat.com;
> zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com; chris@...is-wilson.co.uk; Kirti Wankhede
> <kwankhede@...dia.com>; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan.lv@...el.com>;
> daniel@...ll.ch; Zhang, Tina <tina.zhang@...el.com>; intel-gvt-
> dev@...ts.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10] vfio: ABI for mdev display dma-buf operation
> 
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 08:14:08AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >   Hi,
> >
> > > > +struct vfio_device_query_gfx_plane {
> > > > +	__u32 argsz;
> > > > +	__u32 flags;
> > > > +	struct vfio_device_gfx_plane_info plane_info;
> > > > +	__u32 plane_type;
> > > > +	__s32 fd; /* dma-buf fd */
> > > > +	__u32 plane_id;
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > >
> > > It would be better to have comment here about what are expected
> > > values for plane_type and plane_id.
> >
> > plane_type is DRM_PLANE_TYPE_*.
> >
> > yes, a comment saying so would be good, same for drm_format which is
> > DRM_FORMAT_*.  While looking at these two: renaming plane_type to
> > drm_plane_type (for consistency) is probably a good idea too.
> >
> > plane_id needs a specification.
> 
> Why do you need plane_type? With universal planes the plane_id along is
> sufficient to identify a plane on a given drm device instance. I'd just remove it.
> -Daniel
The plane_type here, is to ask the mdev vendor driver to return the information according to the value in field plane_type. So, it's a input field.
The values in plane_type field is the same of drm_plane_type. And yes, it's better to use drm_plane_type instead of plane_id. 
Thanks.

Tina
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
> _______________________________________________
> intel-gvt-dev mailing list
> intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gvt-dev

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