Re: [PATCH v6 15/18] drm/virtio: rework virtio_gpu_transfer_to_host_ioctl fencing
From: Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@gmail.com>
Date: 2019-07-04 19:08:14
On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 4:51 AM Gerd Hoffmann [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi,quoted
quoted
convert_to_hw_box(&box, &args->box); if (!vgdev->has_virgl_3d) { virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_to_host_2d - (vgdev, qobj, offset, + (vgdev, gem_to_virtio_gpu_obj(objs->objs[0]), offset, box.w, box.h, box.x, box.y, NULL); + virtio_gpu_array_put_free(objs);Don't we need this in non-3D case as well?No, ...quoted
quoted
virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_to_host_3d - (vgdev, qobj, + (vgdev, vfpriv ? vfpriv->ctx_id : 0, offset, - args->level, &box, fence); - reservation_object_add_excl_fence(qobj->base.base.resv, - &fence->f); + args->level, &box, objs, fence);... 3d case passes the objs list to virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_to_host_3d, so it gets added to the vbuf and released when the command is finished.
Why doesn't this apply to virtio_gpu_cmd_transfer_to_host_2d? When object array was introduced, it was said that the object array was to keep the objects alive until the vbuf using the objects is retired.. That sounded applicable to any vbuf that uses objects.
cheers, Gerd