Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1313338
| From | Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework |
| Date | 2016-01-20 17:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qT3NU-CC-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qRe14-7zo-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qSYbw-51L-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qT25t-7Pe-35@gated-at.bofh.it> <qT2yt-8hL-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 04:02:31PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 20-01-16 om 15:32 schreef Gustavo Padovan: > > 2016-01-20 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>: > > > >> Hey, > >> > >> Op 15-01-16 om 15:55 schreef Gustavo Padovan: > >>> From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> > >>> > >>> This patch series de-stage the sync framework, and in order to accomplish that > >>> a bunch of cleanups/improvements on the sync and fence were made. > >>> > >>> The sync framework contained some abstractions around struct fence and those > >>> were removed in the de-staging process among other changes: > >>> > >>> Userspace visible changes > >>> ------------------------- > >>> > >>> * The sw_sync file was moved from /dev/sw_sync to <debugfs>/sync/sw_sync. No > >>> other change. > >>> > >>> Kernel API changes > >>> ------------------ > >>> > >>> * struct sync_timeline is now struct fence_timeline > >>> * sync_timeline_ops is now fence_timeline_ops and they now carry struct > >>> fence as parameter instead of struct sync_pt > >>> * a .cleanup() fence op was added to allow sync_fence to run a cleanup when > >>> the fence_timeline is destroyed > >>> * added fence_add_used_data() to pass a private point to struct fence. This > >>> pointer is sent back on the .cleanup op. > >>> * The sync timeline function were moved to be fence_timeline functions: > >>> - sync_timeline_create() -> fence_timeline_create() > >>> - sync_timeline_get() -> fence_timeline_get() > >>> - sync_timeline_put() -> fence_timeline_put() > >>> - sync_timeline_destroy() -> fence_timeline_destroy() > >>> - sync_timeline_signal() -> fence_timeline_signal() > >>> > >>> * sync_pt_create() was replaced be fence_create_on_timeline() > >>> > >>> Internal changes > >>> ---------------- > >>> > >>> * fence_timeline_ops was removed in favor of direct use fence_ops > >>> * fence default functions were created for fence_ops > >>> * removed structs sync_pt, sw_sync_timeline and sw_sync_pt > >>> > >>> Gustavo Padovan (29): > >>> staging/android: fix sync framework documentation > >>> staging/android: fix checkpatch warning > >>> staging/android: rename sync_fence_release > >>> staging/android: rename 'android_fence' to 'sync_fence' > >>> staging/android: remove not used sync_timeline ops > >>> staging/android: create a 'sync' dir for debugfs information > >>> staging/android: move sw_sync file to debugfs file > >>> staging/android: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE when releasing sync_fence > >>> staging/android: rename struct sync_fence's variables to 'sync_fence' > >>> staging/android: rename 'sync_pt' to 'fence' in struct sync_fence_cb > >>> dma-buf/fence: move sync_timeline to fence_timeline > >>> staging/android: remove struct sync_pt > >>> dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_enable_signaling() > >>> dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_release() > >>> dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_get_driver_name() > >>> dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_timeline_name() > >> This is misleading. I think timeline_fence prefix would be more appropriate here. > > Why? These fence_default_.. functions are fence_ops and not related to > > fence_timeline in any way. > Because they're using fence_parent, which should probably be renamed to fence_to_timeline() > > The name makes it sound as if they could apply to all type of fences, I don't think this is the case. > >> I also believe this should be done in multiple series. First series should de-stage the userspace fence framework. The next series should fix up android_fence and maybe rename it to timeline_fence since sync_fence is already used for the userspace fd, which would add more confusion? > > Sure. I've been thinking on how to split this properly. I'm trying to > > add a bunch of clean up/renaming first, eg the sync_fence rename to > > sync_file that Daniel Vetter and I discussed. > > > > Next my plan would be move sync_timeline to fence_timeline, add the > > fence_default.. fence_ops, clean up sw_sync and finally merge > > fence_context and fence_timeline. > > > > Looking at how sync and fence It looks easier to me to de-stage sync_timeline first than userspace > > fence. > There's already code to add a sync_fence_create_dma export [1][2]. So if you want to de-stage it then there will be users for it. > > sync_pt otoh has no upstream in-kernel users. It was a wrapper to keep android drivers api compatible with the fence api. > > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/67845/ > [2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/67846/ We kinda don't have open-source userspace for this stuf though ... -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:00 +0100
[RFC 19/29] dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_fill_driver_data() Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:00 +0100
[RFC 15/29] dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_get_driver_name() Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:00 +0100
[RFC 29/29] dma-buf/fence: de-stage sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:00 +0100
[RFC 26/29] dma-buf/fence: remove pointless fence_timeline_signal at destroy phase Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:00 +0100
Re: [RFC 26/29] dma-buf/fence: remove pointless fence_timeline_signal at destroy phase John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> - 2016-01-15 18:50 +0100
Re: [RFC 26/29] dma-buf/fence: remove pointless fence_timeline_signal at destroy phase Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> - 2016-01-15 19:10 +0100
Re: [RFC 26/29] dma-buf/fence: remove pointless fence_timeline_signal at destroy phase Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com> - 2016-01-16 00:50 +0100
[RFC 08/29] staging/android: Remove WARN_ON_ONCE when releasing sync_fence Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:10 +0100
[RFC 02/29] staging/android: fix checkpatch warning Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:10 +0100
[RFC 11/29] dma-buf/fence: move sync_timeline to fence_timeline Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:10 +0100
Re: [RFC 11/29] dma-buf/fence: move sync_timeline to fence_timeline Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com> - 2016-01-20 02:00 +0100
[RFC 13/29] dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_enable_signaling() Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:10 +0100
[RFC 05/29] staging/android: remove not used sync_timeline ops Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:10 +0100
[RFC 14/29] dma-buf/fence: create fence_default_release() Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-15 16:10 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-01-15 20:20 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> - 2016-01-19 12:10 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-19 16:30 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> - 2016-01-19 17:20 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-19 19:00 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> - 2016-01-19 19:10 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-19 19:20 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-19 21:20 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> - 2016-01-19 21:40 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> - 2016-01-20 11:30 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-20 15:40 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> - 2016-01-20 16:10 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> - 2016-01-20 17:30 +0100
Re: [RFC 00/29] De-stage android's sync framework Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> - 2016-01-20 19:30 +0100
csiph-web