Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On Thu, 16 May 2019 at 10:59, Jean Hertel wrote:
>
> On 8th May you Wrote:
> >Hi Emil,
> >
> >>This is the tricky part - wish I could find my notes they have better
> >>brain-dump.
> >>It's OK to have the library as both front (config tool) and backend
> >>(used by mesa) although:
> >> - special care on splitting and annotating the API is needed
> >> - handling this "extra" dependency would be fiddly for slower moving
> >> distros
> >>
> >I'm not sure I get the whole picture of what you are suggesting, so I put
> >some ideas on how I think such API would work [here][1].
> >
> >>> What about the current configuration files? Do you think there is a
> >>> better way to handle them?
> >>> They are for in a xml format, which is far from optimal.
> >>>
> >>What seems to be the problem with XML? The files are meant to be
> >>read/written to $app.
> >>
> >
> >I dislike XML because it is too ugly. Something more natural and easy to
> >read/write would be more interesting.
> >Like a YML format. Ideally I would like to use JSON, but then it becomes a
> >lot harder for people to write this by hand in case the GUI tools don't
> >offer >the options they want/need.
> >Of course this is just my point of view, and not necessarily a real issue.
> >
> >Kind Regards,
> >Jean Hertel
> >
> >[1]: https://github.com/jlHertel/libdriconfig/blob/master/USAGE.md
>
> Hey Emil,
> Did you get a chance to look in my proposed way of building this new API?
>
> Some comments would be welcome.
> Also, CC'ing Rob, as I think he would also have interest in this.
>
Had a quick look and noticed a few architectural nits.
I am a bit split between opaque structs vs not - slightly leaning
towards the former.
Reason being is that doing internal re-design becomes much easier and
we're baking less ABI into the users.
The following seems reasonable flow:
- enumerate devices
- query specifics - pci id/platform, memory, driver (kernel and/or
mesa), supported APIs (GLX,EGL,GBM, GL,GLES, NINE, VDPAU/OMX? Vulkan)
- set specifics - mesa driver at least (think amdgpu vs amdgpu-pro
on same kernel module)
[backend specific]
- create device - sets the details ... APIs will be a bit fiddly
- delete device - do we really need it? figure out the details
- enumerate_apps/profiles (device) - there's special handle for the
global/default profile
- query - name, executable, options
- set
[not backend specific]
- create/delete
- create_from_{global,other_profile)
- enumerate_options(device, API_MASK /* say GL_THREAD is GLX|EGL */, profile )
- query_option - type/value
- set_option - type(?)/value
[backend specific]
- create/delete
The tricky part wrt the fronend/backend mentioned earlier is that we
don't want !misc application to say "hey device/driver X can support
feature Y, on API Z".
Only the backend (mesa) is allowed to do that ;-)
HTH
Emil
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On 8th May you Wrote: >Hi Emil, > >>This is the tricky part - wish I could find my notes they have better >>brain-dump. >>It's OK to have the library as both front (config tool) and backend >>(used by mesa) although: >> - special care on splitting and annotating the API is needed >> - handling this "extra" dependency would be fiddly for slower moving distros >> >I'm not sure I get the whole picture of what you are suggesting, so I put some >ideas on how I think such API would work [here][1]. > >>> What about the current configuration files? Do you think there is a better >>> way to handle them? >>> They are for in a xml format, which is far from optimal. >>> >>What seems to be the problem with XML? The files are meant to be >>read/written to $app. >> > >I dislike XML because it is too ugly. Something more natural and easy to >read/write would be more interesting. >Like a YML format. Ideally I would like to use JSON, but then it becomes a lot >harder for people to write this by hand in case the GUI tools don't offer >the >options they want/need. >Of course this is just my point of view, and not necessarily a real issue. > >Kind Regards, >Jean Hertel > >[1]: https://github.com/jlHertel/libdriconfig/blob/master/USAGE.md Hey Emil, Did you get a chance to look in my proposed way of building this new API? Some comments would be welcome. Also, CC'ing Rob, as I think he would also have interest in this. Kind Regards, Jean Hertel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Hi Emil, >This is the tricky part - wish I could find my notes they have better >brain-dump. >It's OK to have the library as both front (config tool) and backend >(used by mesa) although: > - special care on splitting and annotating the API is needed > - handling this "extra" dependency would be fiddly for slower moving distros > I'm not sure I get the whole picture of what you are suggesting, so I put some ideas on how I think such API would work [here][1]. >> What about the current configuration files? Do you think there is a better >> way to handle them? >> They are for in a xml format, which is far from optimal. >> >What seems to be the problem with XML? The files are meant to be >read/written to $app. > I dislike XML because it is too ugly. Something more natural and easy to read/write would be more interesting. Like a YML format. Ideally I would like to use JSON, but then it becomes a lot harder for people to write this by hand in case the GUI tools don't offer the options they want/need. Of course this is just my point of view, and not necessarily a real issue. Kind Regards, Jean Hertel [1]: https://github.com/jlHertel/libdriconfig/blob/master/USAGE.md ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 5:43 PM Emil Velikov wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 19:38, Jean Hertel wrote: > > > > >Could not find my original notes, but the idea is roughly as follows: > > >- introduce a separate (user only?) library - say libmesa-config.so > > > - ^^ provides an API to query/set attributes, via numerical tokens > > > - any localisation is built on top of ^^ as standalone files > > > > > >Reasoning: > > >- library reused by anyone to make a pretty config tool in their > > >toolkit and/or language > > > - numerical tokens are trivial to handle and cheap - can be > > >binned/deprecated easily > > > - translation lives outside of the driver - the driver doesn't care > > >about it, so don't bloat > > > - translators do not need access to mesa - one less hurdle/obstacle > > > > > > > > >Hope it makes sense, not sure if coffee has kicked in fully ;-) > > >-Emil > > > > Hey Emil, > > > > I really liked this idea, specially since right now I have a lot of issues > > to query which option is exactly supported by each driver. Like in the > > scenarios when you have multiple drivers that support the same GPU, or when > > you have a difference between userspace and kernel space driver naming. > > > > Can you give me more details on the idea? > > If I got it right, this library would be independent and mesa will itself > > use it to query the options it wants/needs. > > > This is the tricky part - wish I could find my notes they have better > brain-dump. > It's OK to have the library as both front (config tool) and backend > (used by mesa) although: > - special care on splitting and annotating the API is needed > - handling this "extra" dependency would be fiddly for slower moving distros > > > What about the current configuration files? Do you think there is a better > > way to handle them? > > They are for in a xml format, which is far from optimal. > > > What seems to be the problem with XML? The files are meant to be > read/written to $app. > > > What about Vulkan? > > As far as I known the current setup only handles OpenGL driver > > configurations. > > > The current setup handles GLX, DRI and Nine IIRC. One of my goals was > to split and structure this in a more obvious way. FYI We have Vulkan integrated with driconf configs now too. > > HTH > Emil > ___ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 19:38, Jean Hertel wrote: > > >Could not find my original notes, but the idea is roughly as follows: > >- introduce a separate (user only?) library - say libmesa-config.so > > - ^^ provides an API to query/set attributes, via numerical tokens > > - any localisation is built on top of ^^ as standalone files > > > >Reasoning: > >- library reused by anyone to make a pretty config tool in their > >toolkit and/or language > > - numerical tokens are trivial to handle and cheap - can be > >binned/deprecated easily > > - translation lives outside of the driver - the driver doesn't care > >about it, so don't bloat > > - translators do not need access to mesa - one less hurdle/obstacle > > > > > >Hope it makes sense, not sure if coffee has kicked in fully ;-) > >-Emil > > Hey Emil, > > I really liked this idea, specially since right now I have a lot of issues to > query which option is exactly supported by each driver. Like in the scenarios > when you have multiple drivers that support the same GPU, or when you have a > difference between userspace and kernel space driver naming. > > Can you give me more details on the idea? > If I got it right, this library would be independent and mesa will itself use > it to query the options it wants/needs. > This is the tricky part - wish I could find my notes they have better brain-dump. It's OK to have the library as both front (config tool) and backend (used by mesa) although: - special care on splitting and annotating the API is needed - handling this "extra" dependency would be fiddly for slower moving distros > What about the current configuration files? Do you think there is a better > way to handle them? > They are for in a xml format, which is far from optimal. > What seems to be the problem with XML? The files are meant to be read/written to $app. > What about Vulkan? > As far as I known the current setup only handles OpenGL driver configurations. > The current setup handles GLX, DRI and Nine IIRC. One of my goals was to split and structure this in a more obvious way. HTH Emil ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
>Could not find my original notes, but the idea is roughly as follows: >- introduce a separate (user only?) library - say libmesa-config.so > - ^^ provides an API to query/set attributes, via numerical tokens > - any localisation is built on top of ^^ as standalone files > >Reasoning: >- library reused by anyone to make a pretty config tool in their >toolkit and/or language > - numerical tokens are trivial to handle and cheap - can be >binned/deprecated easily > - translation lives outside of the driver - the driver doesn't care >about it, so don't bloat > - translators do not need access to mesa - one less hurdle/obstacle > > >Hope it makes sense, not sure if coffee has kicked in fully ;-) >-Emil Hey Emil, I really liked this idea, specially since right now I have a lot of issues to query which option is exactly supported by each driver. Like in the scenarios when you have multiple drivers that support the same GPU, or when you have a difference between userspace and kernel space driver naming. Can you give me more details on the idea? If I got it right, this library would be independent and mesa will itself use it to query the options it wants/needs. What about the current configuration files? Do you think there is a better way to handle them? They are for in a xml format, which is far from optimal. What about Vulkan? As far as I known the current setup only handles OpenGL driver configurations. Kind Regards, Jean Hertel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Yeah, moving this to the mesa group in gitlab would be great for visibility. On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 12:22 +, Jean Hertel wrote: > Any other mesa developer interested in seeing this move forward? > > Kind Regards, > Jean Hertel > > ___ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Any other mesa developer interested in seeing this move forward? Kind Regards, Jean Hertel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 17:25, Jean Hertel wrote: > > From: Emil Velikov > Sent: 4th april, 2019 13:08 > >Yes I have interest in a configuration tool, although my vision varies > >a lot from what adriconf and its predecessor. > > I'm super interested and open to hear yours, and other mesa devs, ideas > on how a good configuration utility should look and behave. > Feel free to reach over with ideas/suggestions/visions. > Anything you think could make the current situation better. > > >That said, I don't mind if the project migrates under > >gitlab.fd.o/mesa/ - it would be beneficial to have it close-by. > > > >What I would strongly suggest is to add some documentation about patch > >submission, review process and releasing criteria/process. > > I will try to come up with something this weekend regarding > patch submission, reviews and release criteria. > As soon as I have some documentation I will come back to you. > > Thanks for the feedback on this. > Could not find my original notes, but the idea is roughly as follows: - introduce a separate (user only?) library - say libmesa-config.so - ^^ provides an API to query/set attributes, via numerical tokens - any localisation is built on top of ^^ as standalone files Reasoning: - library reused by anyone to make a pretty config tool in their toolkit and/or language - numerical tokens are trivial to handle and cheap - can be binned/deprecated easily - translation lives outside of the driver - the driver doesn't care about it, so don't bloat - translators do not need access to mesa - one less hurdle/obstacle Hope it makes sense, not sure if coffee has kicked in fully ;-) -Emil ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
>That said, I don't mind if the project migrates under >gitlab.fd.o/mesa/ - it would be beneficial to have it close-by. > >What I would strongly suggest is to add some documentation about patch >submission, review process and releasing criteria/process. > I updated the docs on how to submit patches and how I'm doing releases. https://github.com/jlHertel/adriconf/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md Kind Regards, Jean Hertel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Hi Trevor, From: Trevor Woerner >On Mon 2019-04-01 @ 08:55:56 PM, Jean Hertel wrote: >> - What about GSOC? On the X.Org [page][2] there is still a driconf >> replacement idea. If we move, can we replace this with some adriconf >> improvement ideas? >> >> [2]: https://www.x.org/wiki/SummerOfCodeIdeas/ > >Are you interested in doing this as a GSOC project? Or merely pointing out >that there is a GSOC suggestion for a project that is similar to what you're >proposing? Actually adriconf is exactly what this GSOC project is proposing: a DriConf replacement with some improvements. >Are you able to edit the wiki as Rob suggests? If not, I should be able to >edit it. I don't have any write permissions to the wiki. Not even a freedesktop account. But I would prefer to have the project properly migrated under mesa umbrella before editing any content of the wiki. If you are more interested in the project, feel free to take a look [here][1]. Kind Regards, Jean Hertel [1]: https://github.com/jlHertel/adriconf/ ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On Mon 2019-04-01 @ 08:55:56 PM, Jean Hertel wrote: > - What about GSOC? On the X.Org [page][2] there is still a driconf > replacement idea. If we move, can we replace this with some adriconf > improvement ideas? > [2]: https://www.x.org/wiki/SummerOfCodeIdeas/ Are you interested in doing this as a GSOC project? Or merely pointing out that there is a GSOC suggestion for a project that is similar to what you're proposing? Are you able to edit the wiki as Rob suggests? If not, I should be able to edit it. Best regards, Trevor ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
From: Emil Velikov Sent: 4th april, 2019 13:08 >Yes I have interest in a configuration tool, although my vision varies >a lot from what adriconf and its predecessor. I'm super interested and open to hear yours, and other mesa devs, ideas on how a good configuration utility should look and behave. Feel free to reach over with ideas/suggestions/visions. Anything you think could make the current situation better. >That said, I don't mind if the project migrates under >gitlab.fd.o/mesa/ - it would be beneficial to have it close-by. > >What I would strongly suggest is to add some documentation about patch >submission, review process and releasing criteria/process. I will try to come up with something this weekend regarding patch submission, reviews and release criteria. As soon as I have some documentation I will come back to you. Thanks for the feedback on this. Kind Regards, Jean Hertel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 19:40, Jean Hertel wrote: > > Hey Emil, > > You also showed interest in this project in the past. > Any thoughts about moving it to mesa gitlab? > Yes I have interest in a configuration tool, although my vision varies a lot from what adriconf and its predecessor. That said, I don't mind if the project migrates under gitlab.fd.o/mesa/ - it would be beneficial to have it close-by. What I would strongly suggest is to add some documentation about patch submission, review process and releasing criteria/process. HTH Emil ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Hey Emil, You also showed interest in this project in the past. Any thoughts about moving it to mesa gitlab? Kind Regards, Jean Hertel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Hi, On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 00:19, Rob Clark wrote: > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 1:55 PM Jean Hertel wrote: > > As we have spoken already in the past, I have the intention to move > > adriconf under the mesa project umbrella, as an official tool for > > configuring DRI options. > > I would like to ask your advice, as well as other mesa developers, on how > > to properly do this. (If people is willing to accept it) > > So far the questions I have are: > > > > - What is the proccess to become an official mesa tool? > > Maybe a gitlab ticket? Or ping daniels and ask? > > > - Do I need any approval? Like from other mesa developers or X.Org > > Foundation? > > No approval from X.Org foundation or anything like that.. maybe some > general consensus among mesa dev's (or at least a few others who think > it is a good idea). For the record, I think living under > gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/adriconf makes sense. Right. As long as Mesa people agree then any project owner can just go ahead and create the owner in Mesa themselves; no need for admins to do anything. > > - Also, what about gitlab? If we move, can we use it? I already know the > > tool and would really appreciate using it. > > Yes, I don't think the fd.o admin's are creating new non-gitlab projects. Absolutely correct. > > - Is there anyone else willing to have commit rights on it? I known the > > project is public, but I feel it would be nice to have someone else also > > with commit/admin rights in case I'm hit by a bus :) > > Hmm, I guess it is possible to set it up so anyone with mesa commit > rights would have adriconf commit rights. But afaiu gitlab is > somewhat flexible on groups so we could I guess do something more fine > grained. It's quite fine-grained, yes. It inherits the permissions of the Mesa group, so anyone who has permission to Mesa can commit to it. You can also add committers specifically to the adriconf project, so they can only commit to that. Again this doesn't need admin intervention, you can just go ahead and do it yourself. Cheers, Daniel ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
+daniels On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 1:55 PM Jean Hertel wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > As we have spoken already in the past, I have the intention to move adriconf > under the mesa project umbrella, as an official tool for configuring DRI > options. > I would like to ask your advice, as well as other mesa developers, on how to > properly do this. (If people is willing to accept it) > So far the questions I have are: > > - What is the proccess to become an official mesa tool? Maybe a gitlab ticket? Or ping daniels and ask? > - Do I need any approval? Like from other mesa developers or X.Org Foundation? No approval from X.Org foundation or anything like that.. maybe some general consensus among mesa dev's (or at least a few others who think it is a good idea). For the record, I think living under gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/adriconf makes sense. > - In this proccess, can we rename the adriconf to use a proper mesa > namespace? Right now it is named as br.com.jeanhertel.adriconf which is quite > weird, as the intention is not to be a comercial tool. See [Flathub][1]. I guess you are referring to what it is called in flathub? I guess that would make more sense. > - Also, what about gitlab? If we move, can we use it? I already know the tool > and would really appreciate using it. Yes, I don't think the fd.o admin's are creating new non-gitlab projects. > - Is there anyone else willing to have commit rights on it? I known the > project is public, but I feel it would be nice to have someone else also with > commit/admin rights in case I'm hit by a bus :) Hmm, I guess it is possible to set it up so anyone with mesa commit rights would have adriconf commit rights. But afaiu gitlab is somewhat flexible on groups so we could I guess do something more fine grained. > - What about GSOC? On the X.Org [page][2] there is still a driconf > replacement idea. If we move, can we replace this with some adriconf > improvement ideas? Actually either way we should update the wiki page. I think you should be able to create an account and make updates? BR, -R > > Kind Regards, > Jean Hertel > > [1]: https://flathub.org/apps/details/br.com.jeanhertel.adriconf > [2]: https://www.x.org/wiki/SummerOfCodeIdeas/ ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
[Mesa-dev] Move adriconf to mesa repositories
Hi Rob, As we have spoken already in the past, I have the intention to move adriconf under the mesa project umbrella, as an official tool for configuring DRI options. I would like to ask your advice, as well as other mesa developers, on how to properly do this. (If people is willing to accept it) So far the questions I have are: - What is the proccess to become an official mesa tool? - Do I need any approval? Like from other mesa developers or X.Org Foundation? - In this proccess, can we rename the adriconf to use a proper mesa namespace? Right now it is named as br.com.jeanhertel.adriconf which is quite weird, as the intention is not to be a comercial tool. See [Flathub][1]. - Also, what about gitlab? If we move, can we use it? I already know the tool and would really appreciate using it. - Is there anyone else willing to have commit rights on it? I known the project is public, but I feel it would be nice to have someone else also with commit/admin rights in case I'm hit by a bus :) - What about GSOC? On the X.Org [page][2] there is still a driconf replacement idea. If we move, can we replace this with some adriconf improvement ideas? Kind Regards, Jean Hertel [1]: https://flathub.org/apps/details/br.com.jeanhertel.adriconf [2]: https://www.x.org/wiki/SummerOfCodeIdeas/ ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
