Re: [PATCH] media: vb2: unify calling of set_page_dirty_lock
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 22:02:05 -0400
- From: Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: vb2: unify calling of set_page_dirty_lock
Le mardi 13 mars 2018 à 21:09 -0400, Nicolas Dufresne a écrit :
> > I've looked into this again. I have hit the same issue but with CPU
> > to
> > DRM, using DMABuf allocated from DRM Dumb buffers. In that case,
> > using
> > DMA_BUF_IOCTL_SYNC fixes the issues.
> > This raises a lot of question around the model used in V4L2. As you
> > mention, prepare/finish are missing in dma-vmalloc mem_ops. I'll
> > give
> > a
> > try implementing that, it should cover my initial use case, but
> > then
> > I
> > believe it will fail if my pipeline is:
> > UVC -> in plane CPU modification -> DRM
> > Because we don't implement begin/end_cpu_access on our exported
> > DMABuf.
> > It should also fail for the following use case:
> > UVC (importer) -> DRM
> > UVC driver won't call the remote dmabuf being/end_cpu_access
> > method.
> > This one is difficult because UVC driver and vivid don't seem to be
> > aware of being an importer, exported or simply exporting to CPU
> > (through mmap). I believe what we have now pretty much assumes the
> > what
> > we export as vmalloc is to be used by CPU only. Also, the usual
> > direction used by prepare/finish ops won't work for drivers like
> > vivid
> > and UVC that write into the buffers using the cpu.
> > To be continued ...
> While I was writing that, I was already outdated, as of now, we only
> have one ops, called sync. This implements the to_cpu direction only.
Replying to myself again, obviously looking at the old videobuf code
can only get one confused.