Re: [Intel-gfx] [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH v4 03/18] drm/sched: Add dependency tracking

From: Melissa Wen <mwen@igalia.com>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cc: "moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
	<linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"Jack Zhang" <Jack.Zhang1@amd.com>,
	"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>,
	"Intel Graphics Development" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"DRI Development" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Steven Price" <steven.price@arm.com>,
	"Melissa Wen" <melissa.srw@gmail.com>,
	"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	"open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
	<linux-media@vger.kernel.org>, "Lee Jones" <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Luben Tuikov" <luben.tuikov@amd.com>,
	"Nirmoy Das" <nirmoy.aiemd@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH v4 03/18] drm/sched: Add dependency tracking
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 16:20:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210728152044.ygq4cw7i2tm5mcyy@mail.igalia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uE7GBZYih=KZm5t7-_0P8i7M0tA2KgSOgJsm+-HUE+HzA@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2554 bytes --]

On 07/28, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 1:29 PM Christian König
> <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Am 27.07.21 um 13:09 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > > Adding a few more people to this bikeshed.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:02 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > >
> > >> @@ -349,6 +367,13 @@ int drm_sched_job_init(struct drm_sched_job *job,
> > >>                         struct drm_sched_entity *entity,
> > >>                         void *owner);
> > >>   void drm_sched_job_arm(struct drm_sched_job *job);
> > >> +int drm_sched_job_await_fence(struct drm_sched_job *job,
> > >> +                             struct dma_fence *fence);
> > >> +int drm_sched_job_await_implicit(struct drm_sched_job *job,
> > >> +                                struct drm_gem_object *obj,
> > >> +                                bool write);
> > >> +
> > >> +
> > > I'm still waiting on the paint delivery for these two functions so I
> > > can finish this shed.
> >
> > Well I wouldn't call that bike shedding, good names are important.
> >
> > Just imaging we would have called the exclusive-fence write-fence instead.
> 
> Sure naming matters, but at least to my English understanding there's
> not a semantic different between telling something to await for
> something else (i.e. add a dependency) or to tell something to add a
> dependency (i.e. await that thing later on before you start doing your
> own thing).
> 
> Exclusive vs write fence otoh is a pretty big difference in what it means.
> 
> But also if there's consensus that I'm wrong then I'm happy to pick
> the more preferred of the two options I deem equivalent.
> 
> > What speaks against calling them add_dependency() and
> > _add_implicit_depencencies() ?
> 
> Nothing. I just like another ack on this before I rename it all. Also
> I wasnt sure what you'd want to name the implicit dependency thing.
> 
> Lucas, Boris, Melissa, any acks here?

so, my English is far from good; but _add_dependency sounds good to me.

Melissa

> -Daniel
> 
> > Regards,
> > Christian.
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks, Daniel
> > >
> > >>   void drm_sched_entity_modify_sched(struct drm_sched_entity *entity,
> > >>                                      struct drm_gpu_scheduler **sched_list,
> > >>                                      unsigned int num_sched_list);
> > >> --
> > >> 2.32.0
> > >>
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx