[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a46f49b8-3680-9476-046b-e3d821184851@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 18:59:14 +0200
From: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc: airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch, matthew.brost@...el.com,
thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com, sarah.walker@...tec.com,
donald.robson@...tec.com, christian.koenig@....com,
faith.ekstrand@...labora.com, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v4 7/8] drm/gpuvm: generalize
dma_resv/extobj handling and GEM validation
On 9/22/23 13:45, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 16:42:40 +0200
> Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> + /**
>> + * @DRM_GPUVM_RESV_PROTECTED: GPUVM is protected externally by the
>> + * GPUVM's &dma_resv lock
>
> I think we need to be more specific, and list the fields/operations
> that need to be externally protected when DRM_GPUVM_RESV_PROTECTED is
> set.
I agree, we should probably keep a list somewhere. However, there are also
lockdep asserts where a lock is required to be held.
>
>> + */
>> + DRM_GPUVM_RESV_PROTECTED = (1 << 0),
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists