On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:52:35 +0100, Thomas Hellstr�m <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. A separate sarea to contain these locks, to avoid messing up the > current sarea with binary incompatibilities as a consequence.
It would probably be better to extend the current driver specific sarea. You can negotiate the driver interface version to enable the new functions. There should be room: #define SAREA_MAX 0x2000 Where is sarea allocated? I looked for five minutes and couldn't find it. > 2. Other kernel modules should be able to take and release these locks. > (V4L for example). > 3. Each DMA buffer is marked (or in the VIA case, each submission to the > ring-buffer is marked) wether it accesses the resource that is protected > by a certain lock. > 4. A resource will become available to a client when the client has > taken the lock and there are no pending DMA buffers / parts of buffers > that are marked touching this resource. > 5. The client is responsible for reinitializing the resource once the > lock is taken. > > These are just initial thoughts. Is there a mechanism for this in DRM > today or could > it be done in a better way? > > /Thomas > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE > LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click > -- > _______________________________________________ > Dri-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel > -- Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idU88&alloc_id065&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
