On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 11:00 PM, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 2:01 AM, Tomasz Figa <tf...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Hi Rob, >> >> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:36 PM, Robert Foss <robert.f...@collabora.com> >> wrote: >>>>>>>> uint32_t (*get_fd)(buffer_handle_t handle, uint32_t plane); >>>>>>>> uint64_t (*get_modifier)(buffer_handle_t handle, uint32_t >>>>>>>> plane); >>>>>>>> uint32_t (*get_offsets)(buffer_handle_t handle, uint32_t plane); >>>>>>>> uint32_t (*get_stride)(buffer_handle_t handle, uint32_t plane); >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> } gralloc_funcs_t; >>>> >>>> >>>> These ones? > >>>> Yeah, if we could retrieve such function pointer struct using perform >>>> or any equivalent (like the implementation-specific methods in >>>> gralloc1, but not sure if that's going to be used in practice >>>> anywhere), it could work for us. >>> >>> >>> So this is where you and Rob Herring lose me, I don't think I understand >>> quite how the gralloc1 call would be used, and how it would tie into this >>> handle struct. I think I could do with some guidance on this. >> >> This would be very similar to gralloc0 perform call. gralloc1 >> implementations need to provide getFunction() callback [1], which >> returns a pointer to given function. The list of standard functions is >> defined in the gralloc1.h header [2], but we could take some random >> big number and use it for our function that fills in provided >> gralloc_funcs_t struct with necessary pointers. >> >> [1] >> https://android.googlesource.com/platform/hardware/libhardware/+/master/include/hardware/gralloc1.h#300 >> [2] >> https://android.googlesource.com/platform/hardware/libhardware/+/master/include/hardware/gralloc1.h#134 > > This is a deadend because it won't work with a HIDL based > implementation (aka gralloc 2.0). You can't set function pointers (or > any pointers) because gralloc runs in a different process. Yes, > currently gralloc is a pass-thru HAL, but AIUI that will go away.
Part of it. I can't see IMapper being implemented by a separate process. You can't map a buffer into one process from another process. But anyway, it's a good point, thanks, I almost forgot about its existence. I'll do further investigation. Best regards, Tomasz _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
