dma-resv: Give the docs a do-over
Specifically document the new/clarified rules around how the shared fences do not have any ordering requirements against the exclusive fence. But also document all the things a bit better, given how central struct dma_resv to dynamic buffer management the docs have been very inadequat. - Lots more links to other pieces of the puzzle. Unfortunately ttm_buffer_object has no docs, so no links :-( - Explain/complain a bit about dma_resv_locking_ctx(). I still don't like that one, but fixing the ttm call chains is going to be horrible. Plus we want to plug in real slowpath locking when we do that anyway. - Main part of the patch is some actual docs for struct dma_resv. Overall I think we still have a lot of bad naming in this area (e.g. dma_resv.fence is singular, but contains the multiple shared fences), but I think that's more indicative of how the semantics and rules are just not great. Another thing that's real awkard is how chaining exclusive fences right now means direct dma_resv.exclusive_fence pointer access with an rcu_assign_pointer. Not so great either. v2: - Fix a pile of typos (Matt, Jason) - Hammer it in that breaking the rules leads to use-after-free issues around dma-buf sharing (Christian) Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org> Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com> Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210805104705.862416-21-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment