From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0b-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 616CF143C4F for ; Tue, 21 May 2024 15:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.180.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716304233; cv=none; b=koXD3pWnPpfNUTqCVPg82rYOXbvUei3io+ofTgTgb3sAU6VkPS8mL6/Zyx532raUBr36eeV9CSx0f9XO6Qx2rhmbeZ7a4UXL7Vf5sOGJHnp6acJUOU4vkUGjYybAigFlUgKZwDFCgq9GXirehhS5M/QLjLpwzc/7vw8ERHfbss4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716304233; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EHYF7HSAAGP6IsO1C3kwUfIiiidpH5FaYpY1q8dpGNM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=XzNr4Opt+4tUAkM6R2PAQNYb2AXl5b3CbIlR5rV0eRFLZ3n0ItMNuhRLbuabi6VBqlK8X9NT69y5g/Mq8fEHkNg8awdZvHXtzW4JhsX5EHZmZ7WXneitBity91Z8qfC5cgeODTdyJYV4BUBKPQybQrOQ1DxLk+bZnW039dWxXgg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quicinc.com header.i=@quicinc.com header.b=lVYAWRBU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.180.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quicinc.com header.i=@quicinc.com header.b="lVYAWRBU" Received: from pps.filterd (m0279871.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 44LEj8J7031089; Tue, 21 May 2024 15:10:13 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quicinc.com; h= message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:references:from :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= qcppdkim1; bh=Qn4a7U5EFTYvJ9ioNxoOdApph5VlgHcMCKWRJlk0lbM=; b=lV YAWRBUHegBVCIyACSukvVvyzc4g/+rEsUV5bRKZ9BHq2cHF4U1uYYeE07zpwWgmu m6R9wklhbdfLuBRaHHAfiu3TOIzA2JloTsWb6gigDSP+yXqS8ZZ9Yvsxx1wbdO7C TWsm789ece426nC07MPRB8rzzoSsjTyLvw9hLmiSPzMqWSZdCTMQZ9hqCJlqkyrU P9xYxax4ZKWYfUxFMQNzsxso26WuLOFOC0NJsAaDYNGJbQSRBIciIWmIHW84oKvI eYk/Y1gdipHRfCZaurfUe+/AnPBs/CdnLmwzfdzWjZ/+F+HLIVsZahJfn0JJuLhc 6zkp28t5EtMVwgLBUozQ== Received: from nalasppmta04.qualcomm.com (Global_NAT1.qualcomm.com [129.46.96.20]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y6psax92a-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 May 2024 15:10:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com (nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com [10.47.209.196]) by NALASPPMTA04.qualcomm.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTPS id 44LFAA1O031574 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 May 2024 15:10:10 GMT Received: from [10.226.59.182] (10.80.80.8) by nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.209.196) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.9; Tue, 21 May 2024 08:10:09 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 09:10:08 -0600 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.0 Subject: Re: DRM Accel BoF at Linux Plumbers Content-Language: en-US To: Tomeu Vizoso , open list , dri-devel , David Airlie , Philipp Zabel , Christian Gmeiner , Oded Gabbay , Olof Johansson , Lucas Stach References: From: Jeffrey Hugo In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.141.250) To nalasex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.209.196) X-QCInternal: smtphost X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=5800 signatures=585085 X-Proofpoint-GUID: hxakFKEuUBJeIGJ_WXH_kjQc2IOtJ4v1 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: hxakFKEuUBJeIGJ_WXH_kjQc2IOtJ4v1 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.650,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-05-21_09,2024-05-21_01,2024-05-17_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2405010000 definitions=main-2405210113 On 5/21/2024 8:41 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 2:12 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 10:46:01AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to use the chance at the next Plumbers to discuss the >>> present challenges related to ML accelerators in mainline. >>> >>> I'm myself more oriented towards edge-oriented deployments, and don't >>> know enough about how these accelerators are being used in the cloud >>> (and maybe desktop?) to tell if there is enough overlap to warrant a >>> common BoF. >>> >>> In any case, these are the topics I would like to discuss, some >>> probably more relevant to the edge than to the cloud or desktop: >>> >>> * What is stopping vendors from mainlining their drivers? >>> >>> * How could we make it easier for them? >>> >>> * Userspace API: how close are we from a common API that we can ask >>> userspace drivers to implement? What can be done to further this goal? >>> >>> * Automated testing: DRM CI can be used, but would be good to have a >>> common test suite to run there. This is probably dependent on a common >>> userspace API. >>> >>> * Other shared userspace infrastructure (compiler, execution, >>> synchronization, virtualization, ...) >>> >>> * Firmware-mediated IP: what should we do about it, if anything? >>> >>> * Any standing issues in DRM infra (GEM, gpu scheduler, DMABuf, etc) >>> that are hurting accel drivers? >>> >>> What do people think, should we have a drivers/accel-wide BoF at >>> Plumbers? If so, what other topics should we have in the agenda? >> >> Yeah sounds good, and I'll try to at least attend lpc this year since it's >> rather close ... Might be good to explicitly ping teams of merged and >> in-flight drivers we have in accel already. > > Sounds like a good idea to me. Will check if the people that sent the > previous aborted attempts are still interested in this Looks like the Intel VPU folks are missing from this thread. I like the idea of a BoF. I suspect I will be remote but this list of topics looks good to me. Nothing obvious missing from what I can tell. -Jeff