On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 09:51:58PM +0200, Johannes Obermayr wrote:
These patches should be sent to dri-devel, not mesa-dev.
> ---
> xf86drm.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xf86drm.c b/xf86drm.c
> index 6ea068f..798f1fd 100644
> --- a/xf86drm.c
> +++ b/xf86drm.c
> @@ -255,6 +255,7 @@ static int drmMatchBusID(const char *id1, const char *id2, int pci_domain_ok)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#if !defined(UDEV)
> /**
> * Handles error checking for chown call.
> *
> @@ -284,6 +285,7 @@ static int chown_check_return(const char *path, uid_t owner, gid_t group)
> path, errno, strerror(errno));
> return -1;
> }
> +#endif
>
> /**
> * Open the DRM device, creating it if necessary.
> @@ -303,13 +305,15 @@ static int drmOpenDevice(long dev, int minor, int type)
> stat_t st;
> char buf[64];
> int fd;
> +
> + sprintf(buf, type ? DRM_DEV_NAME : DRM_CONTROL_DEV_NAME, DRM_DIR_NAME, minor);
> + drmMsg("drmOpenDevice: node name is %s\n", buf);
> +
> +#if !defined(UDEV)
> mode_t devmode = DRM_DEV_MODE, serv_mode;
> int isroot = !geteuid();
> uid_t user = DRM_DEV_UID;
> gid_t group = DRM_DEV_GID, serv_group;
> -
> - sprintf(buf, type ? DRM_DEV_NAME : DRM_CONTROL_DEV_NAME, DRM_DIR_NAME, minor);
> - drmMsg("drmOpenDevice: node name is %s\n", buf);
>
> if (drm_server_info) {
> drm_server_info->get_perms(&serv_group, &serv_mode);
> @@ -318,7 +322,6 @@ static int drmOpenDevice(long dev, int minor, int type)
> group = (serv_group >= 0) ? serv_group : DRM_DEV_GID;
> }
>
> -#if !defined(UDEV)
> if (stat(DRM_DIR_NAME, &st)) {
> if (!isroot)
> return DRM_ERR_NOT_ROOT;
You should not mix code with declarations.
However, UDEV and non-UDEV codepaths share very little code. I'm wondering
whether it would be better to organize it like:
static int drmOpenDevice(long dev, int minor, int type)
{
#if defined(UDEV)
...
#else
...
#endif
}
> @@ -1395,8 +1398,10 @@ drm_context_t *drmGetReservedContextList(int fd, int *count)
> }
>
> res.contexts = list;
> - if (drmIoctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_RES_CTX, &res))
> + if (drmIoctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_RES_CTX, &res)) {
> + drmFree(retval);
> return NULL;
> + }
>
> for (i = 0; i < res.count; i++)
> retval[i] = list[i].handle;
> --
This is not enough. list will leak too.
Make it a separate patch please.
Marcin
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
