<MoeIcenowy>
but the discussion on this vulkan spec PR seems to be not understandable to me now
<MoeIcenowy>
because of not knowing why is EGL extension implemented in such a way
<MTCoster>
Because the spec requires clarification regarding exactly which device the exposed DRM nodes belong to. Many consumers of VK_EXT_physical_device_drm expect to be able to use the exposed primary DRM node as a display, which is not the case for powervr (and others) since the display hardware is separate
<MTCoster>
RE the EGL issue, it appears that's been cleared since the EGL equivalent behaviour is the same as the proposed clarification in the Vulkan extension
<MoeIcenowy>
okay
<enunes>
MTCoster: well it's been 2 years now and still waiting on it, do you think we could reconsider and just implement the extension the preferred way (from the Mesa perspective) now?
<enunes>
it's now exactly the same as Panfrost would implement it and worst case it's changeable later, that might be better than wait forever without any implementation
<daniels_>
bearing in mind that VK_EXT_physical_device_drm won't even necessarily work with a separate KMS device since the user would need to make sure they were the DRM master to make that work
<frankbinns>
enunes: daniels_: can all the Mesa drivers be aligned based on the proposed spec wording and then if a new extension is needed do something different then we can cross that bridge later? :)
<enunes>
frankbinns: I considered to propose that, just didnt type it down yet, but yeah it would make sense to me at this point to just change Mesa to what we are proposing, it's not like it would be off-spec as the spec currently is anyway
<enunes>
after seeing that the EGL extension is driver-independent maybe the Vulkan one could also be driver-independent anyway, so it would be automatically aligned as well
<frankbinns>
probably the best way to progress things at this point tbh as this is just going to drag on and on otherwise :(
<enunes>
yeah... I'll add rebasing my 2 year old MR together with re-testing the new batch of upstream changes
<frankbinns>
awesome, thank you :)
<daniels_>
tbh I thought that all the Mesa drivers were already aligned on doing what was proposed
<frankbinns>
if they are then even better :)
<enunes>
I don't think v3dv is, but I guess given the discussion in the spec proposal they would be willing to align it?
<daniels_>
sounds like, yeah
<MoeIcenowy>
Well how do you think of utilizing Mesa powervr driver on TH1520 now?
<MoeIcenowy>
its GPU KM part is already mainlined (and at least entered linux-next