Hi Gustavo,
On 26 February 2016 at 18:31, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Play safe and add flags member to all structs. So we don't need to
> break API or create new IOCTL in the future if new features that requires
> flags arises.
>
> v2: check if flags are valid (zero, in this case)
>
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/android/sync.c | 7 ++++++-
> drivers/staging/android/uapi/sync.h | 6 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/sync.c b/drivers/staging/android/sync.c
> index 837cff5..54fd5ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/android/sync.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/sync.c
> @@ -445,6 +445,11 @@ static long sync_file_ioctl_merge(struct sync_file *sync_file,
> goto err_put_fd;
> }
>
> + if (data.flags) {
> + err = -EFAULT;
-EINVAL ?
> + goto err_put_fd;
> + }
> +
> fence2 = sync_file_fdget(data.fd2);
> if (!fence2) {
> err = -ENOENT;
> @@ -511,7 +516,7 @@ static long sync_file_ioctl_fence_info(struct sync_file *sync_file,
> if (copy_from_user(&in, (void __user *)arg, sizeof(*info)))
> return -EFAULT;
>
> - if (in.status || strcmp(in.name, "\0"))
> + if (in.status || in.flags || strcmp(in.name, "\0"))
> return -EFAULT;
-EINVAL ?
>
> if (in.num_fences && !in.sync_fence_info)
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/uapi/sync.h b/drivers/staging/android/uapi/sync.h
> index 9aad623..f56a6c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/android/uapi/sync.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/uapi/sync.h
> @@ -19,11 +19,13 @@
> * @fd2: file descriptor of second fence
> * @name: name of new fence
> * @fence: returns the fd of the new fence to userspace
> + * @flags: merge_data flags
> */
> struct sync_merge_data {
> __s32 fd2;
> char name[32];
> __s32 fence;
> + __u32 flags;
The overall size of the struct is not multiple of 64bit, so things
will end up badly if we decide to extend it in the future. Even if
there's a small chance that update will be needed, we might as well
pad it now (and check the padding for zero, returning -EINVAL).
> };
>
> /**
> @@ -31,12 +33,14 @@ struct sync_merge_data {
> * @obj_name: name of parent sync_timeline
> * @driver_name: name of driver implementing the parent
> * @status: status of the fence 0:active 1:signaled <0:error
> + * @flags: fence_info flags
> * @timestamp_ns: timestamp of status change in nanoseconds
> */
> struct sync_fence_info {
> char obj_name[32];
> char driver_name[32];
> __s32 status;
> + __u32 flags;
> __u64 timestamp_ns;
Should we be doing some form of validation in sync_fill_fence_info()
of 'flags' ?
Regards,
Emil
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
