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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 13:54:57 -0700 From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com> To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com> Cc: Tina Zhang <tina.zhang@...el.com>, chris@...is-wilson.co.uk, joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com, zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com, zhiyuan.lv@...el.com, zhi.a.wang@...el.com, kevin.tian@...el.com, daniel@...ll.ch, kwankhede@...dia.com, hang.yuan@...el.com, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch> Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 5/6] vfio: ABI for mdev display dma-buf operation On Thu, 9 Nov 2017 19:35:14 +0100 Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > struct vfio_device_gfx_plane_info lacks the head field we've been > > discussing. Thanks, > > Adding multihead support turned out to not be that easy. There are > corner cases like a single framebuffer spawning both heads. Also it > would be useful to somehow hint to the guest which heads it should use. > > In short: Proper multihead support is more complex than just adding a > head field for later use. So in a short private discussion with Tina we > came to the conclusion that it will be better add multihead support to > the API when the first driver wants use it, so we can actually test the > interface and make sure we didn't miss anything. Adding a incomplete > multihead API now doesn't help anybody. Do you think we can enable multi-head and preserve backwards compatibility within this API proposed here? Thanks, Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists