From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Damien Lespiau Subject: Re: [RFC] libdrm_intel: Add support for userptr objects Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 14:16:59 +0100 Message-ID: <20140709131659.GC341@strange.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1393432901-31951-1-git-send-email-tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> <20140619111320.GK18833@strange.amr.corp.intel.com> <53BD3EB8.3080201@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AD326E6AD for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2014 06:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53BD3EB8.3080201@linux.intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Tvrtko Ursulin Cc: Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 02:08:08PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 06/19/2014 12:13 PM, Damien Lespiau wrote: > >On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 04:41:41PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > >>From: Tvrtko Ursulin > >> > >>Allow userptr objects to be created and used via libdrm_intel. > >> > >>At the moment tiling and mapping to GTT aperture is not supported > >>due hardware limitations across different generations and uncertainty > >>about its usefulness. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin > >>--- > >> include/drm/i915_drm.h | 16 +++++ > >> intel/intel_bufmgr.c | 13 ++++ > >> intel/intel_bufmgr.h | 5 ++ > >> intel/intel_bufmgr_gem.c | 154 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >> intel/intel_bufmgr_priv.h | 12 +++- > >> 5 files changed, 198 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > >Apart from couple of remarks below I couldn't find anything that would > >prevent merging this. Well, except maybe that it'd be very nice to have > >some feedback from someone using it, we do have an API/ABI guarantee on > >libdrm after all. > > Looks like I've forgotten to reply to this. I did address the other > review comments and sent out a v2 back then. > > But for what users are concerned, apart from internal ones who have > been using this API for some years now, I don't know of any. Well, considering this is only a wrapper of an ioctl() already upstreamed, I'm inclined to just push it as is. Daniel any thoughts? -- Damien