Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2018-11-14 12:08:06)
> We've been dealing a number of 32/64 bits flags issues lately :
>
> - 085603287452fc ("drm/i915: Compare user's 64b GTT offset even on 32b")
> - c58281056a8b26 ("drm/i915: Mark up GTT sizes as u64")
> - 83b466b1dc5f0b ("drm/i915: Mark pin flags as u64")
>
> As userspace and in particular Mesa pulls in the uAPI headers and
> builds up flags using the uAPI defines we should probably make those
> more explicitly 32/64bits aware.
I just want to note that since these happen to be signed values, we
don't have the same issue with zero-extension of their inverses. I don't
think there's user impact here; no requirement for cc:stable.
> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 90 ++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index e477ef8c644e..f562c4239bd8 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -895,12 +895,12 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 {
> */
> __u64 offset;
>
> -#define EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_FENCE (1<<0)
> -#define EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_GTT (1<<1)
> -#define EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE (1<<2)
> -#define EXEC_OBJECT_SUPPORTS_48B_ADDRESS (1<<3)
> -#define EXEC_OBJECT_PINNED (1<<4)
> -#define EXEC_OBJECT_PAD_TO_SIZE (1<<5)
> +#define EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_FENCE (1ULL<<0)
We should probably appease CODING_STYLE a bit more while we are here;
(1ULL << 0)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
