On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:38 AM Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Tomasz Figa <tf...@chromium.org> wrote: > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:59 PM Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Robert Foss <robert.f...@collabora.com > > wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On 2018-05-25 10:38, Tomasz Figa wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:33 PM Robert Foss < robert.f...@collabora.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Hey, > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> On 2018-05-25 02:17, Rob Herring wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 6:23 AM, Robert Foss < > > robert.f...@collabora.com> > >> >> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Hey, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> I don't think I've received any feedback on this version yet. > >> >>>>> If anyone has some time to spare, it would be nice to get it merged. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Just to be clear about the libdrm branch linked in the cover letter, > >> >>>>> it is not required. Only for virgl platforms which happens to be > > what > >> >>>>> I tested on. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> virgl will still fallback to using the first render node without > > those > >> >>>> libdrm changes, right? If not, I don't think we should apply until > >> >>>> we're not breaking a platform... > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> No it will not fall back. I agree that holding off makes more sense. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> What's the reason of this problems? Is it because of drmGetDevices()? > >> >> Since > >> >> we don't really use it for anything other than getting the list of > > render > >> >> nodes in the system, maybe we could just iterate over any /dev/renderD* > >> >> nodes explicitly and avoid introducing new problems? > >> > > >> > > >> > That's exactly the problem, and yes we could 100% solve by iterating > > over > >> > /dev/renderD* nodes. I originally assumed we wouldn't want to do that, > > but > >> > rather use the libdrm interfaces. > >> > > >> > But for the next spin I could avoid using libdrm, should I? > > > >> I don't have an opinion on libdrm really, but I do think we should > >> fallback to the 1st (only) render node rather than just fail. > > > > We do, even with libdrm. > > > > AFAICT, the problem with virgl seems to be that drmGetDevices() doesn't > > include devices on virtio bus in the results, which means that there likely > > wouldn't be any render node returned. > Okay. I still don't get why we search by bus in the first place. Who > cares what bus the gpu sits on. We don't search by bus. drmGetDevices() iterates over DRI nodes, queries them and discards those of which bus type it fails to recognize. I have no idea why it does so, though. > Now I have an opinion. We should just iterate over render nodes > matching by name or use the first node if we don't have a set name. Yeah, I suggested that too in my previous reply. It doesn't look like libdrm has any sane helper that could help us. Best regards, Tomasz _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
