On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 04:24:37PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
On 23 April 2015 at 15:07, Peter Antoine peter.antoine@intel.com wrote:
There are several issues with the hardware locks functions that stretch from kernel crashes to priority escalations. This new test will test the the fixes for these features.
This test will cause a driver/kernel crash on un-patched kernels, the following patches should be applied to stop the crashes:
drm: Kernel Crash in drm_unlock drm: Fixes unsafe deference in locks.
Issue: VIZ-5485 Signed-off-by: Peter Antoine peter.antoine@intel.com
lib/ioctl_wrappers.c | 19 +++++ lib/ioctl_wrappers.h | 1 + tests/Makefile.sources | 1 + tests/drm_hw_lock.c | 207 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 228 insertions(+) create mode 100644 tests/drm_hw_lock.c
diff --git a/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c b/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c index 000d394..ad8b3d3 100644 --- a/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c +++ b/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c @@ -964,6 +964,25 @@ bool gem_has_bsd2(int fd) { return gem_has_enable_ring(fd,LOCAL_I915_PARAM_HAS_BSD2); } +#define I915_PARAM_HAS_LEGACY_CONTEXT 35
Please add some API documentation for this new function here.
+bool drm_has_legacy_context(int fd) +{
int tmp = 0;drm_i915_getparam_t gp;memset(&gp, 0, sizeof(gp));gp.value = &tmp;gp.param = I915_PARAM_HAS_LEGACY_CONTEXT;/** if legacy context param is not supported, then it's old and we* can assume that the HW_LOCKS are supported.*/if (drmIoctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GETPARAM, &gp) != 0)return true;
Would not a simpler test be to try and legally acquire a hwlock? If it fails, hwlocks are not supported. No need for a PARAM. -Chris