Re: [PATCH 10/10] gpu: host1x: Optionally block when acquiring channel

[Dmitry Osipenko <digetx-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

On 11.11.2017 00:15, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> On 07.11.2017 18:29, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> On 07.11.2017 16:11, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>>> On 05.11.2017 19:14, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>> On 05.11.2017 14:01, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>>>>> Add an option to host1x_channel_request to interruptibly wait for a
>>>>> free channel. This allows IOCTLs that acquire a channel to block
>>>>> the userspace.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't it be more optimal to request channel and block after job's pining,
>>>> when all patching and checks are completed? Note that right now we have locking
>>>> around submission in DRM, which I suppose should go away by making locking fine
>>>> grained.
>>>
>>> That would be possible, but I don't think it should matter much since contention
>>> here should not be the common case.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or maybe it would be more optimal to just iterate over channels, like I
>>>> suggested before [0]?
>>>
>>> Somehow I hadn't noticed this before, but this would break the invariant of
>>> having one client/class per channel.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, currently there is a weak relation of channel and clients device, but seems
>> channels device is only used for printing dev_* messages and device could be
>> borrowed from the channels job. I don't see any real point of hardwiring channel
>> to a specific device or client.
> 
> Although, it won't work with syncpoint assignment to channel.

On the other hand.. it should work if one syncpoint could be assigned to
multiple channels, couldn't it?