[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <237F54289DF84E4997F34151298ABEBC7C626C2A@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 05:00:53 +0000
From: "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@...el.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
CC: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com" <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com" <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>,
"chris@...is-wilson.co.uk" <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
"kwankhede@...dia.com" <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"Lv, Zhiyuan" <zhiyuan.lv@...el.com>,
"daniel@...ll.ch" <daniel@...ll.ch>,
"intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v16 5/6] vfio: ABI for mdev display dma-buf operation
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Williamson [mailto:alex.williamson@...hat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 4:37 AM
> To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
> Cc: Zhang, Tina <tina.zhang@...el.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@...el.com>;
> Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>; intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org;
> joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com; chris@...is-wilson.co.uk; kwankhede@...dia.com;
> Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan.lv@...el.com>; daniel@...ll.ch; intel-gvt-
> dev@...ts.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 5/6] vfio: ABI for mdev display dma-buf operation
>
> On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 10:05:34 +0100
> Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > > > I thought we had agreed to make this behave similar to
> > > > VFIO_GROUP_GET_DEVICE_FD, the ioctl would take a __u32 dmabuf_id
> > > > and return the file descriptor as the ioctl return value. Thanks,
> > >
> > > If we follow VFIO_GROUP_GET_DEVICE_FD, we would lose flags
> > > functionality.
> > > Zhi and Zhenyu, how do you think about it?
> >
> > The ioctl is simple enough that not having flags should not be a
> > problem I think.
> >
> > Also note that dmabuf_id is received using the PLANE_INFO ioctl, so
> > should the need arise to negotiate something in the future chances are
> > high that it can be done using the PLANE_INFO ioctl flags.
>
> Right, the ioctl is "get fd for thing" so we have control of "thing".
> I think we had this same discussion on v15. Thanks,
Then, OK. Thanks.
BR,
Tina
>
> Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists