Re: [PATCH 3/5] drm: Make control nodes master-less v2

Hi

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Thomas Hellstrom thellstrom@vmware.com wrote:

Like for render-nodes, there is no point in maintaining the master concept for control nodes, so set the struct drm_file::master pointer to NULL.

At the same time, make sure DRM_MASTER | DRM_CONTROL_ALLOW ioctls are always allowed when called through the control node. Previously the caller also needed to be master.

v2: Adapt to refactoring of ioctl permission check.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellstrom thellstrom@vmware.com

drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c | 9 +++++---- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c | 5 +++-- include/drm/drmP.h | 5 +++++ 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c index 0afc6e4..e41ee82 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c @@ -307,14 +307,15 @@ static int drm_ioctl_permit(u32 flags, struct drm_file *file_priv) if (unlikely((flags & DRM_AUTH) && !drm_is_render_client(file_priv) && !file_priv->authenticated)) return -EACCES;

•   /* MASTER is only for master */
  

•   if (unlikely((flags & DRM_MASTER) && !file_priv->is_master))
  

•   /* MASTER is only for master or control clients */
  

•   if (unlikely((flags & DRM_MASTER) &&
  

•                !(file_priv->is_master || drm_is_control(file_priv))))
  

imo this looks nicer: (flags & XY) && !is_master && !drm_is_control()

but that's probably a matter of taste

            return -EACCES;

    /* Control clients must be explicitly allowed */
    if (unlikely(!(flags & DRM_CONTROL_ALLOW) &&

•                file_priv->minor->type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL))
  

•                drm_is_control(file_priv)))
            return -EACCES;
  
    /* Render clients must be explicitly allowed */
  

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c index 7f2af9a..08a3196 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c @@ -259,7 +259,8 @@ static int drm_open_helper(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp, /* if there is no current master make this fd it, but do not create * any master object for render clients */ mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);

•   if (!priv->minor->master && !drm_is_render_client(priv)) {
  

•   if (!priv->minor->master && !drm_is_render_client(priv) &&
  

•       !drm_is_control(priv)) {
            /* create a new master */
            priv->minor->master = drm_master_create(priv->minor);
            if (!priv->minor->master) {
  

@@ -297,7 +298,7 @@ static int drm_open_helper(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp, goto out_close; } }

•   } else if (!drm_is_render_client(priv)) {
  

•   } else if (!drm_is_render_client(priv) && !drm_is_control(priv)) {
            /* get a reference to the master */
            priv->master = drm_master_get(priv->minor->master);
    }
  

diff --git a/include/drm/drmP.h b/include/drm/drmP.h index 04a7f31..ff68e26 100644 --- a/include/drm/drmP.h +++ b/include/drm/drmP.h @@ -1246,6 +1246,11 @@ static inline bool drm_is_render_client(struct drm_file *file_priv) return file_priv->minor->type == DRM_MINOR_RENDER; }

+static inline bool drm_is_control(struct drm_file *file_priv)

drm_is_control()? Pretty inexpressive.. Why not keep the _client suffix? drm_is_control_client()..

Thanks David

+{

•   return file_priv->minor->type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL;
  

+}

/******************************************************************/ /** \name Internal function definitions */ /*@{*/ -- 1.7.10.4 _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel