On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 03:54:38PM -0200, Tiago Vignatti wrote: > > Thanks for reviewing, David. Please take a look in my comments in-line. > > > On 02/09/2016 07:26 AM, David Herrmann wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Tiago Vignatti > > <tiago.vignatti@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> <snip> > >> + > >> +#define DMA_BUF_SYNC_READ (1 << 0) > >> +#define DMA_BUF_SYNC_WRITE (2 << 0) > >> +#define DMA_BUF_SYNC_RW (DMA_BUF_SYNC_READ | DMA_BUF_SYNC_WRITE) > >> +#define DMA_BUF_SYNC_START (0 << 2) > >> +#define DMA_BUF_SYNC_END (1 << 2) > >> +#define DMA_BUF_SYNC_VALID_FLAGS_MASK \ > >> + (DMA_BUF_SYNC_RW | DMA_BUF_SYNC_END) > >> + > >> +#define DMA_BUF_BASE 'b' > >> +#define DMA_BUF_IOCTL_SYNC _IOW(DMA_BUF_BASE, 0, struct dma_buf_sync) > > > > Why _IOW? A read-only ioctl should be able to call DMA_BUF_SYNC_READ, right? > > yup. I've changed it to _IOWR now. AFAICS the ioctl only does copy_from_user() so _IOW seemed perfectly correct to me. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
