Re: [PATCH v1 9/9] drivers: hv: dxgkrnl: Implement DXGSYNCFILE

[Iouri Tarassov]

On 1/17/2022 1:35 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 9:34 AM Iouri Tarassov
> <iourit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> btw another idea I had over the w/e: Another option might be to allow
> different backends for sync_file, and then making sure that you cannot
> ever mix dma_fence and hv_dxg_fence type sync_file up (in e.g. the
> merge ioctl).
>
> The issue is that fundamentally dma_fence and memory fences (or umf
> for userspace memory fences as we tend to call them) aren't
> compatible, but some of the interop plans we have is to allow stuffing
> either of them into fence container objects like sync_file. So going
> that route for wddm monitored fence support too could be a really
> future-proof approach, plus it'd allow you to still share the
> sync_file interface code. Not that it's going to be much code sharing,
> since all the implementation code needs to be distinct.
> -Daniel

Thanks Daniel!

I will remove the patch for dxgsyncfile from the next set of upstream 
patches.

It will be added later after a re-design.

Iouri