On 5/18/26 11:14, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hi Christian, > > On Mon, 18 May 2026 09:10:23 +0200 > Christian König <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 5/13/26 18:58, Boris Brezillon wrote: >>> When used without a context, dma_resv are no different from regular >>> locks. Define guards so we can use the guard-syntactic sugars for >>> explicit/implicit scoped locks. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> >> >> Reviewed-by: Christian König <[email protected]> >> >> How do you want to upstream it? My preference would be drm-misc-next, but I >> think I can live with a panthor specific branch as well. > > Everything Panthor related goes through drm-misc-next, so drm-misc-next > also has my preference ;-). But I'd like to wait for more feedback on > the other drm patches, and there are a few things I need to address in > the panthor patches anyway, so it's likely to take a couple more weeks > for this series to hit the drm-misc tree, unless you have a good reason > to fast-track this specific patch.
Well the DMA-buf code itself uses dma_resv_lock/unlock and obviously has test cases for all the different variants. So if you could provide a patch which just switches over the DMA-buf code itself to using guards I can happily take both into drm-misc-next even before the panthor patches are completely reviewed. Regards, Christian. > > Regards, > > Boris
