linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 5/8] drm/fence: add in-fences support

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]

Message-ID: <20160428175525.GA3502@joana>
Date:	Thu, 28 Apr 2016 14:55:25 -0300
From:	Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@...labora.co.uk>
To:	Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
	Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
	Daniel Stone <daniel@...ishbar.org>,
	Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Stone <daniels@...labora.com>,
	Riley Andrews <riandrews@...roid.com>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 5/8] drm/fence: add in-fences support

2016-04-28 Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>:

> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 07:43:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Ville Syrjälä
> > <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >>  - better for tracing, can identify the buffer/fence promptly
> > >
> > > Can fences be reused somehow while still attached to a plane, or ever?
> > > That might cause some oddness if you, say, leave a fence attached to one
> > > plane and then do a modeset on another crtc perhaps which needs to turn
> > > the first crtc off+on to reconfigure something.
> > 
> > Fences auto-disappear of course and don't stick around when you
> > duplicate the drm_plane_state again. I still don't really get the real
> > concerns though ...
> 
> Properties that magically change values shouldn't exist IMO. I guess if
> you could have write-only properties or something it migth be sensible?

We can just not return FENCE_FD on get_props, that would make it
write-only.

	Gustavo