linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] drm: initialize accel framework

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:   Mon, 7 Nov 2022 23:04:42 +0200
From:   Oded Gabbay <ogabbay@...nel.org>
To:     Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>
Cc:     David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Yuji Ishikawa <yuji2.ishikawa@...hiba.co.jp>,
        Jiho Chu <jiho.chu@...sung.com>,
        Daniel Stone <daniel@...ishbar.org>,
        Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>,
        Jacek Lawrynowicz <jacek.lawrynowicz@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maciej Kwapulinski <maciej.kwapulinski@...ux.intel.com>,
        Stanislaw Gruszka <stanislaw.gruszka@...ux.intel.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] drm: initialize accel framework

On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 6:25 PM Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/6/2022 2:02 PM, Oded Gabbay wrote:
>
> > @@ -603,6 +626,14 @@ static int drm_dev_init(struct drm_device *dev,
> >       /* no per-device feature limits by default */
> >       dev->driver_features = ~0u;
> >
> > +     if (drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_COMPUTE_ACCEL) &&
> > +                             (drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_RENDER) ||
> > +                             drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_MODESET))) {
>
> Shouldn't the indentation for the 2nd and 3rd line be such that the
> start of the lines is aligned with the "(" on the first line?
afaik there is no such rule. If there was, checkpatch should have reported that.
Oded