linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20181105063818.b2yvncgzlnat5qn2@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
Date:   Mon, 5 Nov 2018 07:38:18 +0100
From:   Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
To:     Robert Foss <robert.foss@...labora.com>
Cc:     Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@...il.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        "Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ML dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "open list:VIRTIO GPU DRIVER" 
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@...labora.com>,
        Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc_fence()

> > On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 19:38, Robert Foss <robert.foss@...labora.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@...labora.com>
> > > 
> > > Refactor fence creation to remove the potential allocation failure from
> > > the cmd_submit and atomic_commit paths. Now the fence should be allocated
> > > first and just after we should proceed with the rest of the execution.
> > > 
> > 
> > Commit does a bit more that what the above says:
> >   - dummy, factor out fence creation/destruction
> >   - use per virtio_gpu_framebuffer fence
> > 
> > Personally I'd keep the two separate patches and elaborate on the latter.
> > Obviously in that case, one will need to add 3 lines worth of
> > virtio_gpu_fence_alloc() in virtio_gpu_cursor_plane_update which will be nuked
> > with the next patch.
> > 
> > Not a big deal, but it's up-to the maintainer to make the final call if it's
> > worth splitting or not.
> 
> Agreed, I'll hold off with this change until then.

No need to split this, but a bit more verbose commit message would be
good.

cheers,
  Gerd