On 5/21/26 11:01, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Thu, 21 May 2026 10:54:02 +0200 > Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, 21 May 2026 10:36:47 +0200 >> Christian König <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 5/18/26 16:15, Boris Brezillon wrote: >>>> On Mon, 18 May 2026 14:18:41 +0200 >>>> Christian König <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 5/18/26 11:14, Boris Brezillon wrote: >>>>>> Hi Christian, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 18 May 2026 09:10:23 +0200 >>>>>> Christian König <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Christian König <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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-refactor
Yeah looks good, just reorganize the patches by scope and send them out as patch set grouped by lock type. Thanks, Christian.
