Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1673698

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf operations

From Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf operations
Date 2017-06-23 19:20 +0200
Message-ID <tVApr-51a-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (14 earlier) <tULGh-5kK-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tUT17-1FF-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tV5OG-29T-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tVfuF-5s-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tVrcu-7CL-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 09:26:59 +0200
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> wrote:

>   Hi,
> 
> > Is this only going to support accelerated driver output, not basic
> > VGA
> > modes for BIOS interaction?  
> 
> Right now there is no vgabios or uefi support for the vgpu.
> 
> But even with that in place there still is the problem that the display
> device initialization happens before the guest runs and therefore there
> isn't an plane yet ...
> 
> > > Right now the experimental intel patches throw errors in case no
> > > plane
> > > exists (yet).  Maybe we should have a "bool is_enabled" field in
> > > the
> > > plane_info struct, so drivers can use that to signal whenever the
> > > guest
> > > has programmed a valid video mode or not (likewise for the cursor,
> > > which doesn't exist with fbcon, only when running xorg).  With that
> > > in
> > > place using the QUERY_PLANE ioctl also for probing looks
> > > reasonable.  
> > 
> > Sure, or -ENOTTY for ioctl not implemented vs -EINVAL for no
> > available
> > plane, but then that might not help the user know how a plane would
> > be
> > available if it were available.  
> 
> So maybe a "enum plane_state" (instead of "bool is_enabled")?  So we
> can clearly disturgish ENABLED, DISABLED, NOT_SUPPORTED cases?

What's the difference between NOT_SUPPORTED and -ENOTTY on the ioctl?
Perhaps a bit in a flags field could specify EN/DIS-ABLED and leave
room for things we're forgetting.  Keep in mind that we need to use
explicit width fields for a uapi structure, so __u32 vs enum.  Thanks,

Alex

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf         operations "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com> - 2017-06-20 10:50 +0200
  Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-20 13:00 +0200
    Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-20 17:10 +0200
      Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com> - 2017-06-20 19:10 +0200
      RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com> - 2017-06-21 01:10 +0200
        Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-21 01:30 +0200
          RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com> - 2017-06-21 11:30 +0200
            Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-21 13:10 +0200
              Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-21 21:00 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-22 10:40 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-22 21:00 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-23 09:30 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf operations Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com> - 2017-06-23 10:10 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-23 10:40 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-23 18:50 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-23 19:20 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-26 08:20 +0200
              RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com> - 2017-06-22 02:30 +0200
      Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-21 09:40 +0200
    RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com> - 2017-06-24 00:00 +0200
      Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-26 08:40 +0200
        Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-06-26 19:30 +0200
          Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-27 08:20 +0200
            RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations "Zhang, Tina" <tina.zhang@intel.com> - 2017-06-28 14:50 +0200
              Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> - 2017-06-29 08:50 +0200
                Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v9 5/7] vfio: Define vfio based dma-buf  operations Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> - 2017-06-29 10:40 +0200

csiph-web