archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeffrey Hugo <>
To: Dave Airlie <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <>,
	Daniel Vetter <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>
Cc: Oded Gabbay <>, LKML <>
Subject: Re: [git pull] habanalabs pull request for kernel 5.15
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 19:16:59 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 8/19/2021 12:48 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 03:07, Greg KH <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 02:02:09PM +0300, Oded Gabbay wrote:
>>> Hi Greg,
>>> This is habanalabs pull request for the merge window of kernel 5.15.
>>> The commits divide roughly 50/50 between adding new features, such
>>> as peer-to-peer support with DMA-BUF or signaling from within a graph,
>>> and fixing various bugs, small improvements, etc.
>> Pulled and pushed out, thanks!
> NAK for adding dma-buf or p2p support to this driver in the upstream
> kernel. There needs to be a hard line between
> "I-can't-believe-its-not-a-drm-driver" drivers which bypass our
> userspace requirements, and I consider this the line.
> This driver was merged into misc on the grounds it wasn't really a
> drm/gpu driver and so didn't have to accept our userspace rules.
> Adding dma-buf/p2p support to this driver is showing it really fits
> the gpu driver model and should be under the drivers/gpu rules since
> what are most GPUs except accelerators.

Care to elaborate?  I'm not trying to be cute, but all I see here is 
that dma-buf/p2p using drivers must be in drivers/gpu, yet many drivers 
outside of the gpu area use those features.  Surely your position can't 
be that only drivers/gpu can use dma-buf or p2p (which is part of the 
PCIe spec).

> We are opening a major can of worms (some would say merging habanalabs
> driver opened it), but this places us in the situation that if a GPU
> vendor just claims their hw is a "vector" accelerator they can use
> Greg to bypass all the work that been done to ensure we have
> maintainability long term. I don't want drivers in the tree using
> dma-buf to interact with other drivers when we don't have access to a
> userspace project to validate the kernel driver assumptions.

Umm, isn't that [1]?  The Habana device has the most open userspace I'm 
aware of.  Seems disingenuous to claim you don't have access to a 
userspace project for this driver.

[1] -

      parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-25  1:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-19 11:02 Oded Gabbay
2021-08-19 17:04 ` Greg KH
2021-08-19 18:48   ` Dave Airlie
2021-08-20  6:43     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-20 10:02     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-08-22 23:06     ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-08-25  1:16     ` Jeffrey Hugo [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [git pull] habanalabs pull request for kernel 5.15' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).