lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 13/13] [media] v4l: Document explicit synchronization behavior
From
Date
On 03/13/2018 08:33 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 03/09/2018 09:49 AM, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
>> From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.com>
>>
>> Add section to VIDIOC_QBUF and VIDIOC_QUERY_BUF about it
>>
>> v6: - Close some gaps in the docs (Hans)
>>
>> v5:
>> - Remove V4L2_CAP_ORDERED
>> - Add doc about V4L2_FMT_FLAG_UNORDERED
>>
>> v4:
>> - Document ordering behavior for in-fences
>> - Document V4L2_CAP_ORDERED capability
>> - Remove doc about OUT_FENCE event
>> - Document immediate return of out-fence in QBUF
>>
>> v3:
>> - make the out_fence refer to the current buffer (Hans)
>> - Note what happens when the IN_FENCE is not set (Hans)
>>
>> v2:
>> - mention that fences are files (Hans)
>> - rework for the new API
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-qbuf.rst | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-querybuf.rst | 12 ++++--
>> 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-qbuf.rst b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-qbuf.rst
>> index 9e448a4aa3aa..371d84966e34 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-qbuf.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/media/uapi/v4l/vidioc-qbuf.rst
>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ When the buffer is intended for output (``type`` is
>> or ``V4L2_BUF_TYPE_VBI_OUTPUT``) applications must also initialize the
>> ``bytesused``, ``field`` and ``timestamp`` fields, see :ref:`buffer`
>> for details. Applications must also set ``flags`` to 0. The
>> -``reserved2`` and ``reserved`` fields must be set to 0. When using the
>> +``reserved`` field must be set to 0. When using the
>> :ref:`multi-planar API <planar-apis>`, the ``m.planes`` field must
>> contain a userspace pointer to a filled-in array of struct
>> :c:type:`v4l2_plane` and the ``length`` field must be set
>> @@ -118,6 +118,59 @@ immediately with an ``EAGAIN`` error code when no buffer is available.
>> The struct :c:type:`v4l2_buffer` structure is specified in
>> :ref:`buffer`.
>>
>> +Explicit Synchronization
>> +------------------------
>> +
>> +Explicit Synchronization allows us to control the synchronization of
>> +shared buffers from userspace by passing fences to the kernel and/or
>> +receiving them from it. Fences passed to the kernel are named in-fences and
>> +the kernel should wait on them to signal before using the buffer. On the other
>> +side, the kernel can create out-fences for the buffers it queues to the
>> +drivers. Out-fences signal when the driver is finished with buffer, i.e., the
>> +buffer is ready. The fences are represented as a file and passed as a file
>> +descriptor to userspace.
>> +
>> +The in-fences are communicated to the kernel at the ``VIDIOC_QBUF`` ioctl
>> +using the ``V4L2_BUF_FLAG_IN_FENCE`` buffer flag and the `fence_fd` field. If
>> +an in-fence needs to be passed to the kernel, `fence_fd` should be set to the
>> +fence file descriptor number and the ``V4L2_BUF_FLAG_IN_FENCE`` should be set
>> +as well. Setting one but not the other will cause ``VIDIOC_QBUF`` to return
>> +with an error.
>
> This sentence is confusing since it is not clear what 'one' and 'the other' refer
> to. Be specific here. I think it should be 'Setting V4L2_BUF_FLAG_IN_FENCE but not
> fence_fd'.

Ignore this comment.

>
> The fence_fd field will be ignored if the
>> +``V4L2_BUF_FLAG_IN_FENCE`` is not set.

Looking at the code, I don't think this is correct. You get an error if IN_FENCE is
not set but fence_fd is. Removing this sentence would fix this and the previous
sentence would make a lot more sense.

>> +
>> +The videobuf2-core will guarantee that all buffers queued with an in-fence will
>> +be queued to the drivers in the same order. Fences may signal out of order, so
>> +this guarantee at videobuf2 is necessary to not change ordering. So when
>> +waiting on a fence to signal all buffers queued after will be also block until
>
> after -> afterwards
> will be also block -> will also be blocked
>
>> +that fence signal.
>
> signal -> signals

What is missing in the documentation is what happens when you mix in-fence buffers
and buffers without an in-fence.

Regards,

Hans

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-14 17:02    [W:0.108 / U:0.692 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site