Am 16.04.19 um 14:30 schrieb Lionel Landwerlin:
We've been somewhat inconsistent when adding the new ioctl and returned ENODEV instead of EOPNOTSUPPORTED upon failing the syncobj capibility.
Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com Fixes: ea569910cbab98 ("drm/syncobj: add transition iotcls between binary and timeline v2") Fixes: 01d6c357837918 ("drm/syncobj: add support for timeline point wait v8") Cc: Dave Airlie airlied@redhat.com Cc: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com Cc: Chunming Zhou david1.zhou@amd.com
Reviewed-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com for the series.
How about also adding a DRM_CAP_TIMELINE_SYNCOBJ as Daniel suggested so that userspace can note that as well?
Thanks, Christian.
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c index c534c5d46f1e..fb65f13d25cf 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c @@ -756,7 +756,7 @@ drm_syncobj_transfer_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, int ret;
if (!drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_SYNCOBJ))
return -ENODEV;
return -EOPNOTSUPP;if (args->pad) return -EINVAL;
@@ -1107,7 +1107,7 @@ drm_syncobj_timeline_wait_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, int ret = 0;
if (!drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_SYNCOBJ))
return -ENODEV;
return -EOPNOTSUPP;if (args->flags & ~(DRM_SYNCOBJ_WAIT_FLAGS_WAIT_ALL | DRM_SYNCOBJ_WAIT_FLAGS_WAIT_FOR_SUBMIT |