[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZC8FetzkowU4Q59K@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 19:46:34 +0200
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To: Asahi Lina <lina@...hilina.net>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
Luben Tuikov <luben.tuikov@....com>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
andrey.grodzovsky@....com, tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>, yuq825@...il.com,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Regression] drm/scheduler: track GPU active time per entity
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 07:42:44PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> But I think there's tools to make sure we don't dig a complete hole with
> these it sounds like. I guess another topic for pestering the rust folks.
Or to put it very bluntly: Could we make Arc<T> at least runtime enforce
(with the usual lockdep annotation trick like fs_reclaim) that and Drop is
the final one?
If that's the rust Arc<T> linux semantics then I think my worries are 100%
covered. And we'll sort out the trickier type based enforcement for
special cases when they hit us.
The downside is that this is substantially stricter than kref on the C
side, but I think that's a Good Thing :-)
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
Powered by blists - more mailing lists