On Thu, 21 May 2026 10:54:02 +0200 Boris Brezillon boris.brezillon@collabora.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2026 10:36:47 +0200 Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com wrote:
On 5/18/26 16:15, Boris Brezillon wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2026 14:18:41 +0200 Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com wrote:
On 5/18/26 11:14, Boris Brezillon wrote:
Hi Christian,
On Mon, 18 May 2026 09:10:23 +0200 Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com wrote:
On 5/13/26 18:58, Boris Brezillon wrote: > When used without a context, dma_resv are no different from regular > locks. Define guards so we can use the guard-syntactic sugars for > explicit/implicit scoped locks. > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon boris.brezillon@collabora.com
Reviewed-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com
How do you want to upstream it? My preference would be drm-misc-next, but I think I can live with a panthor specific branch as well.
Everything Panthor related goes through drm-misc-next, so drm-misc-next also has my preference ;-). But I'd like to wait for more feedback on the other drm patches, and there are a few things I need to address in the panthor patches anyway, so it's likely to take a couple more weeks for this series to hit the drm-misc tree, unless you have a good reason to fast-track this specific patch.
Well the DMA-buf code itself uses dma_resv_lock/unlock
There's no use in dma-resv.c that can be converted to guards. I gave dma-buf.c a try, but just like for panthor, I don't really like the fact it's halfway through (other locks still use manual locking), so I'd be tempted to convert everything at once for consistency. If you're fine with that, I can give this a try.
Well depends on what everything means. I would only convert dma-buf.c in one patch and nothing else.
By everything I mean all type of locks, not just dma_resv ones.
BTW, I actually did more than just dma-buf.c [1], let me know what you want from there and I'll ditch the rest.
[1]https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/bbrezillon/linux/-/commits/b4/panthor-guard-r...