[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 0/3] egl/android: Remove dependencies on specific grallocs

[Rob Herring]

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Tomasz Figa <tfiga at chromium.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:59 PM Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Robert Foss <robert.foss at collabora.com>
> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2018-05-25 10:38, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 5:33 PM Robert Foss <robert.foss at 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.foss at 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.

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.

Rob