Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-02-21 12:25:55)
>
> On 21/02/2018 11:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > How much do I want this uABI to rot away? Say "Never again!" to implicit
> > aliasing.
> >
> > In the meantime, we do not need to perform duplicate work on bsd2
> > machines, as especially we do not know which engine bsd relates to.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > lib/ioctl_wrappers.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c b/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c
> > index 8748cfcf..868d68f7 100644
> > --- a/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c
> > +++ b/lib/ioctl_wrappers.c
> > @@ -1460,7 +1460,7 @@ bool gem_has_ring(int fd, unsigned ring)
> >
> > /* silly ABI, the kernel thinks everyone who has BSD also has BSD2 */
> > if ((ring & ~(3<<13)) == I915_EXEC_BSD) {
>
> What is this testing for? Why not just ring & i915_EXEC_RING_MASK ==
> I915_EXEC_BSD? It there are some other bits set it will behave strangely.
What other bits? :) (Note EXEC_RING_MASK has the wrong value in the
headers.)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
