On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 09:15:22AM -0600, Jeff Hugo wrote: > On 5/28/2025 3:13 AM, Simona Vetter wrote: > > Handles are per-file, not global, so this makes no sense. Plus it's > > set only after calling drm_gem_handle_create(), and drivers are not > > allowed to further intialize a bo after that function has published it > > already. > > intialize -> initialize > > > It is also entirely unused, which helps enormously with removing it > > :-) > > There is a downstream reference to it which hasn't quite made it upstream > yet, but tweaking that should be fine. This is clearly a problem anyways, so > we'll need to find a solution regardless. Thank you very much for the audit. > > > Since we're still holding a reference to the bo nothing bad can > > happen, hence not cc: stable material. > > > > Cc: Jeff Hugo <jeff.h...@oss.qualcomm.com> > > Cc: Carl Vanderlip <quic_ca...@quicinc.com> > > Cc: linux-arm-...@vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Simona Vetter <simona.vet...@ffwll.ch> > > Signed-off-by: Simona Vetter <simona.vet...@intel.com> > > SOB chain seems weird to me. I got this email from @ffwll.ch, which would be > the author. Where is @intel.com contributing to the handoff of the patch?
I work for intel, so I just whack both of my emails on there for sob purposes. The intel email tends to be a blackhole for public mail, which is why I don't use it as From: for anything public. > Overall, looks good to me. Seems like either I can ack this, and you can > merge, or I can just take it forward. I have no preference. Do you? Whatever you like most, I'll resend the series with the wrong patches dropped soon anyway. -Sima -- Simona Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
