Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:27:12 +0100 | | From | Keith Whitwell <> | | Subject | Re: New DRM driver model - gets rid of DRM() macros! |
| |
Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 03:12:03PM +0100, Keith Whitwell wrote: > >>Thinking about it, it may not have been a problem of crashing, but rather that >> the behaviour visible from a program attempting to read (or poll) was >>different with noop versions of these functions to NULL versions, and that was >>causing problems. This is 18 months ago, so yes, I'm being vague. >> >>The X server does look at this file descriptor, which is where the problem >>would have arisen, but only the gamma & maybe ffb drivers do anything with it. > > > Indeed, for read you're returning 0 now instead of the -EINVAL from common > code when no ->read is present. I'd say the current drm behaviour is a bug, > but if X drivers rely on it.
I'd agree, but it's a widely distributed bug. I guess we can fix it in the X server, but even better would be to rip out the code as it's fundamentally misguided, based on a wierd idea that the kernel would somehow ask the X server to perform a context switch between two userspace clients...
Keith - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |