[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-13 Thread Michel Dänzer
On 13/12/16 05:35 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 01:23:46PM +, Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 10 December 2016 at 21:52, Daniel Vetter >> wrote: >>> No one looks at the major/minor versions except the unique/busid >>> stuff. If we protect that with the master_mutex (since it al

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-13 Thread Emil Velikov
On 13 December 2016 at 09:46, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Michel Dänzer > wrote: >>> Hm, I thought the grand plan is to use -modesetting almost everywhere and >>> forget about all the others? >> >> Maybe if you mean s/grand plan/pipe dream/ ... > > I said "almost ev

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: >> Hm, I thought the grand plan is to use -modesetting almost everywhere and >> forget about all the others? > > Maybe if you mean s/grand plan/pipe dream/ ... I said "almost everywhere", not "everywhere". I'm fully aware that there's tons o

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:39:55AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 10:52:52PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > No one looks at the major/minor versions except the unique/busid > > stuff. If we protect that with the master_mutex (since it also affects > > the unique of each maste

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-13 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 01:23:46PM +, Emil Velikov wrote: > On 10 December 2016 at 21:52, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > No one looks at the major/minor versions except the unique/busid > > stuff. If we protect that with the master_mutex (since it also affects > > the unique of each master, oh well)

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-12 Thread Emil Velikov
On 10 December 2016 at 21:52, Daniel Vetter wrote: > No one looks at the major/minor versions except the unique/busid > stuff. If we protect that with the master_mutex (since it also affects > the unique of each master, oh well) we can mark these two IOCTL with > DRM_UNLOCKED. > > While doing this

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-12 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 10:52:52PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > No one looks at the major/minor versions except the unique/busid > stuff. If we protect that with the master_mutex (since it also affects > the unique of each master, oh well) we can mark these two IOCTL with > DRM_UNLOCKED. > > Whil

[PATCH 1/4] drm: Protect master->unique with dev->master_mutex

2016-12-10 Thread Daniel Vetter
No one looks at the major/minor versions except the unique/busid stuff. If we protect that with the master_mutex (since it also affects the unique of each master, oh well) we can mark these two IOCTL with DRM_UNLOCKED. While doing this I realized that the comment for the magic_map is outdated, I'v