dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

Comes up every few years, gets somewhat tedious to discuss, let's
write this down once and for all.

What I'm not sure about is whether the text should be more explicit in
flat out mandating the amdkfd eviction fences for long running compute
workloads or workloads where userspace fencing is allowed.

v2: Now with dot graph!

v3: Typo (Dave Airlie)

Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Acked-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Acked-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Stone <daniels@collabora.com>
Acked-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jesse Natalie <jenatali@microsoft.com>
Cc: Steve Pronovost <spronovo@microsoft.com>
Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thomas.hellstrom@intel.com>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200709123339.547390-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions