Hi
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Thomas Hellstrom
<thellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Like for render-nodes, there is no point in maintaining the master concept
> for control nodes, so set the struct drm_file::master pointer to NULL.
>
> At the same time, make sure DRM_MASTER | DRM_CONTROL_ALLOW ioctls are always
> allowed when called through the control node. Previously the caller also
> needed to be master.
>
> v2: Adapt to refactoring of ioctl permission check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c | 9 +++++----
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c | 5 +++--
> include/drm/drmP.h | 5 +++++
> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c
> index 0afc6e4..e41ee82 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c
> @@ -307,14 +307,15 @@ static int drm_ioctl_permit(u32 flags, struct drm_file *file_priv)
> if (unlikely((flags & DRM_AUTH) && !drm_is_render_client(file_priv) &&
> !file_priv->authenticated))
> return -EACCES;
> -
> - /* MASTER is only for master */
> - if (unlikely((flags & DRM_MASTER) && !file_priv->is_master))
> +
> + /* MASTER is only for master or control clients */
> + if (unlikely((flags & DRM_MASTER) &&
> + !(file_priv->is_master || drm_is_control(file_priv))))
imo this looks nicer:
(flags & XY) && !is_master && !drm_is_control()
but that's probably a matter of taste
> return -EACCES;
>
> /* Control clients must be explicitly allowed */
> if (unlikely(!(flags & DRM_CONTROL_ALLOW) &&
> - file_priv->minor->type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL))
> + drm_is_control(file_priv)))
> return -EACCES;
>
> /* Render clients must be explicitly allowed */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c
> index 7f2af9a..08a3196 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c
> @@ -259,7 +259,8 @@ static int drm_open_helper(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp,
> /* if there is no current master make this fd it, but do not create
> * any master object for render clients */
> mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
> - if (!priv->minor->master && !drm_is_render_client(priv)) {
> + if (!priv->minor->master && !drm_is_render_client(priv) &&
> + !drm_is_control(priv)) {
> /* create a new master */
> priv->minor->master = drm_master_create(priv->minor);
> if (!priv->minor->master) {
> @@ -297,7 +298,7 @@ static int drm_open_helper(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp,
> goto out_close;
> }
> }
> - } else if (!drm_is_render_client(priv)) {
> + } else if (!drm_is_render_client(priv) && !drm_is_control(priv)) {
> /* get a reference to the master */
> priv->master = drm_master_get(priv->minor->master);
> }
> diff --git a/include/drm/drmP.h b/include/drm/drmP.h
> index 04a7f31..ff68e26 100644
> --- a/include/drm/drmP.h
> +++ b/include/drm/drmP.h
> @@ -1246,6 +1246,11 @@ static inline bool drm_is_render_client(struct drm_file *file_priv)
> return file_priv->minor->type == DRM_MINOR_RENDER;
> }
>
> +static inline bool drm_is_control(struct drm_file *file_priv)
drm_is_control()? Pretty inexpressive.. Why not keep the _client
suffix? drm_is_control_client()..
Thanks
David
> +{
> + return file_priv->minor->type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL;
> +}
> +
> /******************************************************************/
> /** \name Internal function definitions */
> /*@{*/
> --
> 1.7.10.4
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
