On Sat 02 Sep 2017, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Chad Versace <[1][email protected]> > wrote: > > If this flag is set, then the image and it's device memory have the same > lifetime. vkDestroyImage will free its anv_device_memory. > > We need this for VK_ANDROID_native_buffer, because that extension > creates the VkImage and imports its memory in the same call, > vkCreateImage. > > > So, this got me thinking... VK_ANDROID_native_buffer doesn't actually return > the VkDeviceMemory object to the client. Why does anv_image need to own an > anv_device_memory? It's just a wrapper around a pointer and a map anyway. > Why > not just have it own a reference to the BO? We still need the logic here to > release said BO but that sounds like it would shrink the reach of > VK_ANDROID_native_buffer down a bit.
I originally wrote the patches to do what you said: just let anv_image own a reference to the bo. But the resultant code in anv_device.c that imported the fd was too messy, in my opinion. Owning an anv_device_memory instead of anv_bo make the code cleaner. I'll revisit this, and try what you suggest again. Maybe I can keep it clean on the second try. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
