On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 04:43:17PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:36:02PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > The dev->struct_mutex locking in drm_irq.c only protects
> > dev->irq_enabled. Which isn't really much at all and only prevents
> > especially nasty ums userspace fro
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:36:02PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> The dev->struct_mutex locking in drm_irq.c only protects
> dev->irq_enabled. Which isn't really much at all and only prevents
> especially nasty ums userspace from concurrently installing the
> interrupt handling a few times. Or at le
The dev->struct_mutex locking in drm_irq.c only protects
dev->irq_enabled. Which isn't really much at all and only prevents
especially nasty ums userspace from concurrently installing the
interrupt handling a few times. Or at least trying.
There are tons of unlocked readers of dev->irqs_enabled in
