[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190402112113.GD22763@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 04:21:13 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Qiang Yu <yuq825@...il.com>, Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the drm-misc tree
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 10:50:06AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_ctx.c
> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ int lima_ctx_create(struct lima_device *dev, struct lima_ctx_mgr *mgr, u32 *id)
> goto err_out0;
> }
>
> - err = xa_alloc(&mgr->handles, id, UINT_MAX, ctx, GFP_KERNEL);
> + err = xa_alloc(&mgr->handles, id, ctx, XA_LIMIT(*id, UINT_MAX), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (err < 0)
> goto err_out0;
I agree that this is an exact translation of what the code was doing,
but I don't think it's what the author intended the code to do.
They almost certainly meant:
err = xa_alloc(&mgr->handles, id, ctx, xa_limit_32b, GFP_KERNEL);
I'm basing this on:
+struct drm_lima_ctx_create {
+ __u32 id; /* out, context handle */
+ __u32 _pad; /* pad, must be zero */
+};
(and this confusion is exactly why I changed the API ...)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists