linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] drm/vc4: Return -EBUSY if there's already a pending flip event.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 10 May 2016 11:35:04 -0400
From:	Robert Foss <robert.foss@...labora.com>
To:	Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>, daniel.vetter@...ll.ch,
	airlied@...ux.ie, aniel.vetter@...ll.ch, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
	maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, julia.lawall@...6.fr,
	alexander.deucher@....com, daniels@...labora.com,
	derekf@....samsung.com, varadgautam@...il.com
Cc:	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/vc4: Return -EBUSY if there's already a pending
 flip event.



On 2016-05-03 03:22 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> robert.foss@...labora.com writes:
>
>> From: Robert Foss <robert.foss@...labora.com>
>>
>> As per the documentation in drm_crtc.h, atomic_commit should return
>> -EBUSY if an asycnhronous update is requested and there is an earlier
>> update pending.
>>
>> Note: docs cited here are drm_crtc.h, and the whole quote is:
>>
>>      *  - -EBUSY, if an asynchronous updated is requested and there is
>>      *    an earlier updated pending. Drivers are allowed to support a queue
>>      *    of outstanding updates, but currently no driver supports that.
>>      *    Note that drivers must wait for preceding updates to complete if a
>>      *    synchronous update is requested, they are not allowed to fail the
>>      *    commit in that case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@...labora.com>
>
> This looks good to me.  Let's give it a few days on the list for any
> other KMS folks to catch anything.
>

I haven't seen any further feedback regarding this patch.
Does anyone have objections to it being merged?