On 13 August 2018 at 17:18, Tomasz Figa <tf...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:09 AM Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 13 August 2018 at 16:43, Tomasz Figa <tf...@chromium.org> wrote: >> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:35 AM Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 13 August 2018 at 16:16, Tomasz Figa <tf...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> > Hi Emil, >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:48 PM Emil Velikov >> >> > <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> The function name is misleading - it effectively checks if >> >> >> loader_get_driver_for_fd fails. Which can happen only only on strdup >> >> >> error - a close to impossible scenario. >> >> > >> >> > How about a DRI node which doesn't have a driver in Mesa? >> >> > >> >> Can you elaborate a bit - are you thinking of any of the following or >> >> something else: >> >> - no support for vendor X >> >> - supported vendor, missing vendor/device pci id for device X >> >> - supported vendor, built w/o it >> >> >> >> All these are fairly different cases, with somewhat different solution >> >> for each one. >> > >> > Let's say "no support for vendor X", but supported vendor Y GPU next >> > to it. We want this code to skip vendor X DRI node and choose vendor Y >> > DRI node. >> > >> >> >> >> Fwiw the function loader_get_driver_for_fd does: >> >> - gets the vendor/device pci id and maps that to a driver_name >> >> - if device not a pci device (or query fails) - fallback to the name >> >> as returned in drmGetVersion >> > >> > Good catch. Looks like I misunderstood what it does when reviewing >> > Rob's series and existing code doesn't work as I expected. I think it >> > would just error out in the case above, right? >> > >> Determining if a device is "supported" is fairly subtle: >> For example, even if you open the foo_dri.so the driver can fail due >> to old kernel module, LLVM version, etc. >> One solution is to continue loading up-to dri2_create_screen() - if it >> fails fall-back to the next device. >> >> Any objections if I do that as follow-up patch, if you agree of course? > > Our downstream patch [1] actually loaded until > dri2_load_driver(_dri3)() in probe, but if you think > dri2_create_screen() could make more sense, I'm okay with it. Thanks. > Right, patch that does that can be seen here (copy in your inbox) https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/244276/
Can you Ack/R-b/T-b the series - I think all your concerns have been addressed. https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/244366/ https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/244243/ https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/244244/ https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/244240/ https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/244242/ Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev