Hi, First of all, thanks to all for the reviewers and feedbacks. On 10/16, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 02:05:29PM -0300, Rodrigo Siqueira wrote: > > For historical reason, the function drm_wait_vblank_ioctl always return > > -EINVAL if something gets wrong. This scenario limits the flexibility > > for the userspace make detailed verification of the problem and take > > some action. In particular, the validation of “if (!dev->irq_enabled)” > > in the drm_wait_vblank_ioctl is responsible for checking if the driver > > support vblank or not. If the driver does not support VBlank, the > > function drm_wait_vblank_ioctl returns EINVAL which does not represent > > the real issue; this patch changes this behavior by return EOPNOTSUPP. > > Additionally, some operations are unsupported by this function, and > > returns EINVAL; this patch also changes the return value to EOPNOTSUPP > > in this case. Lastly, the function drm_wait_vblank_ioctl is invoked by > > libdrm, which is used by many compositors; because of this, it is > > important to check if this change breaks any compositor. In this sense, > > the following projects were examined: > > > > * Drm-hwcomposer > > * Kwin > > * Sway > > * Wlroots > > * Wayland-core > > * Weston > > * Xorg (67 different drivers) > > > > For each repository the verification happened in three steps: > > > > * Update the main branch > > * Look for any occurrence "drmWaitVBlank" with the command: > > git grep -n "drmWaitVBlank" > > * Look in the git history of the project with the command: > > git log -SdrmWaitVBlank > > > > Finally, none of the above projects validate the use of EINVAL which > > make safe, at least for these projects, to change the return values. > > > > Change since V1: > > Daniel Vetter and Chris Wilson > > - Replace ENOTTY by EOPNOTSUPP > > - Return EINVAL if the parameters are wrong > > > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiramelo@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Can you pls also let intel-gfx-ci test this patch? You just need to > include intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in your recipient list. I did know about intel-gfx-ci, really nice:) Should I CC this mailing list if I send patches to the DRM core, amdgpu, i915, vc4, vgem, and virtio-gpu? I suppose that IGT is running on the CI, right? Another question, do I need to send a V3 with intel-gfx-ci? > For merging, since you plan to stick around doing kms stuff a bit: Want > commit rights for drm-misc? > > https://drm.pages.freedesktop.org/maintainer-tools/getting-started.html Yes, I want :) I will need some guidance, in the beginning, to get confident about the processes. If you can help me with this, I will be glad to play around with 'dim' and the merging tasks. Best Regards > Cheers, Daniel > > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c > > index 98e091175921..80f5a3bb427e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c > > @@ -1533,10 +1533,10 @@ int drm_wait_vblank_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, > > unsigned int flags, pipe, high_pipe; > > > > if (!dev->irq_enabled) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > > if (vblwait->request.type & _DRM_VBLANK_SIGNAL) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > > if (vblwait->request.type & > > ~(_DRM_VBLANK_TYPES_MASK | _DRM_VBLANK_FLAGS_MASK | > > -- > > 2.19.1 > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Rodrigo Siqueira https://siqueira.tech https://twitter.com/siqueirajordao Graduate Student Department of Computer Science University of São Paulo
