drm_minor_alloc() does multiplication on this enum, so the removal ended up moving render nodes down from 128 base to 64. This caused Mesa's surfaceless backend to be unable to open the render nodes, since it was still looking up at 128.
Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt eric@anholt.net Fixes: 0d49f303e8a7 ("drm: remove all control node code") Cc: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch Cc: Sean Paul seanpaul@chromium.org --- include/drm/drm_file.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/include/drm/drm_file.h b/include/drm/drm_file.h index 99ab50cbab00..69b0a8b57502 100644 --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ struct device;
enum drm_minor_type { DRM_MINOR_PRIMARY, + DRM_MINOR_CONTROL, DRM_MINOR_RENDER, };
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 05:14:25PM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
drm_minor_alloc() does multiplication on this enum, so the removal ended up moving render nodes down from 128 base to 64. This caused Mesa's surfaceless backend to be unable to open the render nodes, since it was still looking up at 128.
Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt eric@anholt.net Fixes: 0d49f303e8a7 ("drm: remove all control node code") Cc: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch Cc: Sean Paul seanpaul@chromium.org
Oops.
include/drm/drm_file.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/include/drm/drm_file.h b/include/drm/drm_file.h index 99ab50cbab00..69b0a8b57502 100644 --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ struct device;
enum drm_minor_type { DRM_MINOR_PRIMARY,
- DRM_MINOR_CONTROL,
Maybe add a comment here why we need this? Either way:
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
DRM_MINOR_RENDER, };
-- 2.17.0
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-
Daniel Vetter -
Eric Anholt