From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13BAC433E2 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 09:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1DC20747 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 09:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fooishbar-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@fooishbar-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="rBu3ZBBs" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727004AbgFKJDu (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:03:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37440 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726991AbgFKJDt (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:03:49 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x341.google.com (mail-wm1-x341.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::341]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4CD6C08C5C1 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 02:03:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x341.google.com with SMTP id f185so4263659wmf.3 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 02:03:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fooishbar-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=611EZXoXvMC0wgvkSoDqQkuDX4b96jfM5TQTQEW07+g=; b=rBu3ZBBsiU7BegTaLT92EmVcTqTQ1ln4TngPt+QtaRUJwZJvFNvlbvL3HcjTBtXw9H G1BFGLxRjII2qe+n6Wb4wAjp/MIbndhkzRvvFKrM4W8lQT+ibssLtH8TT46cMB5P5uU3 5NUykMXB6wJxIim5uZLsueE9Lb1sMJwsx7fkaWRSDcEwhKWAYhiGyzIwnkpl/z6oq0Or 4x+BtmbF9c7Gs6DTj+RsOX7oSNj6Q0tkv5onPLhaBIsEtG4yxV9T70vq8ePrXAlDNpD8 5sB2zFwst0zY2C9XYIlAcPCJ2JUIt9V9Hjz4+vjSenZxVun25fMG+8FtkYQcjlFwLPq+ dTPg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=611EZXoXvMC0wgvkSoDqQkuDX4b96jfM5TQTQEW07+g=; b=oZaLWkHXJcD4H/O+7cdTiCvfALR1mkunbhky2aKcJIUb7NUtc4WrOObXtCsMrK4G85 GFSypYUtmwIpVLtbaxC8PK9x7b+dCI+l+grG3X//+X5j1Kl2bYpMjnNhkMch9EbbXY4M MTlcRIbvn/0IhBpebDpagxpIyDUIDdHMN5zUq+YS/5UybtcfXpZuSJFufrge5iRoGqPI /z9GYBiIcOpNp2DaHLnZxyYqpwVVnAqoauU48gMmjiT5yUy1H/5KHC5edIaIzf21i9lB R/pJZE2LshdgoQordqRj0Pjox0L2AQe9Kuc0tVZZlGxmEhdtYFOERMqzv5bJQw8iMgzJ y6LQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533hY/7dN+hwZrGVevY62OeIip12nGPUmzC6feMPzDdgLSUd7bWd Fx82mZZZlCpZPrIb1eqwTCKDIiysZPmq/Xq5CuaFNA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxPKKxxiM1BfEdkh9RUDLtOEwohJAfgWmxAu+vR7pTgkQ6fdURfjYcm3A4r4/Ejum+DBwaGettYUqKJ7IOPnc8= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6a01:: with SMTP id f1mr6984797wmc.52.1591866227178; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 02:03:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200604081224.863494-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20200604081224.863494-4-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <159186243606.1506.4437341616828968890@build.alporthouse.com> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Stone Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:01:46 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 03/18] dma-fence: basic lockdep annotations To: Dave Airlie Cc: Chris Wilson , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter , Intel Graphics Development , LKML , DRI Development , "moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" , Thomas Hellstrom , amd-gfx mailing list , Daniel Vetter , Mika Kuoppala , =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= , Linux Media Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 09:44, Dave Airlie wrote: > On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 18:01, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Introducing a global lockmap that cannot capture the rules correctly, > > Can you document the rules all drivers should be following then, > because from here it looks to get refactored every version of i915, > and it would be nice if we could all aim for the same set of things > roughly. We've already had enough problems with amdgpu vs i915 vs > everyone else with fences, if this stops that in the future then I'd > rather we have that than just some unwritten rules per driver and > untestable. As someone who has sunk a bunch of work into explicit-fencing awareness in my compositor so I can never be blocked, I'd be disappointed if the infrastructure was ultimately pointless because the documented fencing rules were \_o_/ or thereabouts. Lockdep definitely isn't my area of expertise so I can't comment on the patch per se, but having something to ensure we don't hit deadlocks sure seems a lot better than nothing. Cheers, Daniel