On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 11:37 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> I've done some extensive history digging across libdrm, mesa and
> xf86-video-{intel,nouveau,ati}. The only potential user of this with
> kms drivers I could find was ttmtest, which once used drmGetLock
> still. But that mistake was quickly
On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 11:37 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> It can't fail really.
>
> Also remove the redundant kms check Peter added.
>
> Cc: Peter Antoine
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_context.c | 5 ++---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c | 10 +-
> drivers
On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 11:37 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> From: Peter Antoine
>
> The context functions are not used by the i915 driver and should not
> be used by modeset drivers. These driver functions contain several bugs
> and security holes. This change makes these functions optional can be
Please ignore this test as fixes are being implemented differently.
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 15:07 +0100, Peter Antoine wrote:
> There are several issues with the hardware locks functions that stretch
> from kernel crashes to priority escalations. This new test will test the
> the fixes for these fea
On Mon, 2015-05-04 at 15:56 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 07:52:46PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 03:07:56PM +0100, Peter Antoine wrote:
> > > If an application that has a driver lock created, wants the lock the
> > > kernel context, it is not al
On Mon, 2015-05-04 at 15:52 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:52:32AM +0100, chris at chris-wilson.co.uk wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:21:49AM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote:
> > > On 24/04/15 06:52, Antoine, Peter wrote:
> > > > I picked up
On Tue, 2015-04-28 at 16:08 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:29:06AM +0000, Antoine, Peter wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/include/drm/drmP.h b/include/drm/drmP.h index
> > > > > 62c40777..367e42f 100644
> > > > > --- a/inclu
reply at end.
On Tue, 2015-04-28 at 13:40 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 05:52:20AM +0000, Antoine, Peter wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > (replies inline)
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrjal
On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 16:33 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 04:24:37PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> > On 23 April 2015 at 15:07, Peter Antoine wrote:
> > > There are several issues with the hardware locks functions that stretch
> > > from kernel crashes to priority escalations.
Thanks for the review, new patch inbound.
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Wood [mailto:thomas.w...@intel.com]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 4:25 PM
To: Antoine, Peter
Cc: Intel Graphics Development; airlied at redhat.com; dri-devel at
lists.freedesktop.org; Daniel Vetter
Subject: Re
Hi,
(replies inline)
-Original Message-
From: Ville Syrjälä [mailto:ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 6:04 PM
To: Antoine, Peter
Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; airlied at redhat.com; dri-devel at
lists.freedesktop.org; daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch
found it) and we should reward them with a application exit.
Peter.
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 15:39 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 02:34:24PM +0000, Antoine, Peter wrote:
> > Before the patch the system required rebooting (driver crash and/or kernel
> > pani
]
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 3:20 PM
To: Antoine, Peter
Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; airlied at redhat.com; dri-devel at
lists.freedesktop.org; daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/5] drm: Kernel Crash in drm_unlock
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 03:07:54PM +0100, Peter
13 matches
Mail list logo
