On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Disadvantages: >> * depending on userspace architecture, layers left on screen could >> be considered an information leak, ie. new incoming master process >> has access to buffers that are still being scanned out. > > I'm not sure this is much of a problem really, or at least I suspect > we have bigger issues: the GETFB ioctl allows you to get at the gem bo > behind any framebuffer, as long as you're the current master. There's > no need for that framebuffer to be active on the screen. Not sure > that's a good idea really, we might want to fix up that ioctl to only > hand out the backing storage objects for currently active objects. But > kinda separate issue. > > Other Oops, hit send too early: Otherwise looks good. Well, you can forgo the kernel-doc (just leave a comment if you want to explain the difference), since in drm core only the driver interface stuff is documented with kernel-doc. At least that's what I've been doing. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
