On 01.12.2012 16:58, Thierry Reding wrote:
I don't know where you see politics in what I said. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't be making things needlessly complex. In my experience the technically cleanest solution is usually the one with the least complexity.
Let me come up with a proposal and let's then see where to go next.
But you already have extra code in the kernel to patch out expired sync- points. Is it really worth the added effort to burden userspace with this? If so I still think some kind of generic IOCTL to retrieve information about a syncpoint would be better than a sysfs interface.
That's exactly why I mentioned that it's not useful to upstream. There are some cases where user space might want to check if a fence has passed without waiting for it, but that's marginal and could be handled even with waits with zero timeout.
Terje