On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 08:51:37AM -0800, bradley.d.volkin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Brad Volkin <bradley.d.volkin@xxxxxxxxx> > > The length mask is different for each ring and the size can vary, > so we should duplicate the definition with the correct encoding > for each ring. Jumping in here since this highlights the most confusing aspect of this series - the meta patching. Please implement the command parsing infrastructure upfront and in a very small number of patches (most preferably one) that avoids having to add fixes late in the series. I think using s/S/ALLOW/ s/R/REJECT/ s/B/BLACKLIST/ s/W/WHITELIST/ makes the action much more clear, and would rather that every unsafe command starts off as REJECT. (With the whitelist/blacklisting being added as separate patches with justification as they are now.) Since we do disable the security, I would also reject all unknown/unmatched commands and make ALLOW explicit. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
