linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] drivers/accel: define kconfig and register a new major

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20221107132503.GA3590860@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Nov 2022 14:25:03 +0100
From:   Stanislaw Gruszka <stanislaw.gruszka@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@...nel.org>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Maciej Kwapulinski <maciej.kwapulinski@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        stanislaw.gruszka@...el.com, Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jiho Chu <jiho.chu@...sung.com>,
        Jacek Lawrynowicz <jacek.lawrynowicz@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yuji Ishikawa <yuji2.ishikawa@...hiba.co.jp>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] drivers/accel: define kconfig and register a
 new major

Hi

On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:10:36AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 03:01:08PM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> > I don't agree with your statement that it should be "a layer over top of DRM".
> > Anything on top of DRM is a device driver.
> > Accel is not a device driver, it is a new type of drm minor / drm driver.
> 
> Yeah, I still think this is not the right way, you are getting almost
> nothing from DRM and making everything more complicated in the
> process.
> 
> > The only alternative imo to that is to abandon the idea of reusing
> > drm, and just make an independant accel core code.
> 
> Not quite really, layer it properly and librarize parts of DRM into
> things accel can re-use so they are not intimately tied to the DRM
> struct device notion.

What do you mean by "struct device notion" ? struct drm_devce ? 

Regards
Stanislaw