From patchwork Tue Mar 22 18:42:36 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Casey Bowman X-Patchwork-Id: 12788946 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37DE3C433EF for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:42:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94BA310E0AD; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:42:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFFF310E0AD for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:42:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1647974574; x=1679510574; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=rzVQNPJNmRV4hzlDJZWW3J1KA5OHa3f+j3wdMmCERt0=; b=neQ/sfMP+qF6WJxVKe+WSSuaEBBpilq1x3eD/ud7gKt2WQXrtYBCu7iY MtQRUlSemMopJUafZv8VRQqGKc3dCoZtCzDQXRSGgrB8T+Kn84bUxp4k9 8RjEusxCzrAXS5f/MCuhyV6kho7DNDdQJanjVc+9znDfSmYls7FxFN2lG Tny/A85VZ1MQed8S1YRmKFzILWWjklN1ufCgO7m5oDK4OnnZhD8xnSIuS 9MOAxbq29asOZBH682rTzhdHZu1bDWwnFlpswHs9gqbTWtoBBa88fRHTp oJgEMuaFIX3IrjSRLy5+SVnu6iRuZvw2dXUagb+zQkIFyensd8rKwZEjS Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10294"; a="245390204" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,202,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="245390204" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Mar 2022 11:42:54 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,202,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="583392667" Received: from nsajadpo-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO cgbowman-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com) ([10.251.14.169]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Mar 2022 11:42:54 -0700 From: Casey Bowman To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:42:36 -0700 Message-Id: <20220322184237.397484-1-casey.g.bowman@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/1] Splitting up platform-specific calls X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: lucas.demarchi@intel.com, daniel.vetter@intel.com Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" In this RFC I would like to ask the community their thoughts on how we can best handle splitting architecture-specific calls. I would like to address the following: 1. How do we want to split architecture calls? Different object files per platform? Separate function calls within the same object file? 2. How do we address dummy functions? If we have a function call that is used for one or more platforms, but is not used in another, what should we do for this case? I've given an example of splitting an architecture call in my patch with run_as_guest() being split into different implementations for x86 and arm64 in separate object files, sharing a single header. Another suggestion from Michael (michael.cheng@intel.com) involved using a single object file, a single header, and splitting various functions calls via ifdefs in the header file. I would appreciate any input on how we can avoid scaling issues when including multiple architectures and multiple functions (as the number of function calls will inevitably increase with more architectures). v2: Revised to use kernel's platform-splitting scheme. v3: Revised to use simple if-else structure. v4: Modified into more arch-neutral split. Casey Bowman (1): i915/drm: Split run_as_guest into x86 and non-x86 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)