Hey,
Den 2026-03-03 kl. 17:54, skrev Julian Orth: > On Tue, Mar 3, 2026 at 5:40 PM Maarten Lankhorst > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> There is precedence in the ioctl, the pad member is checked against zero for >> the same reason. > > I don't believe that this is comparable. Developers of code developed > against an older kernel could look at the kernel and see that the pad > field was checked against zero. They could not see the same for fields > that didn't exist at the time. > >> The check was there because it is invalid to pass when >> IMPORT/EXPORT_SYNC_FILE was not set. >> >> This is what I would recommend instead: >> >> [...] >> >> + if (!(args->flags & DRM_SYNCOBJ_HANDLE_TO_FD_FLAGS_TIMELINE) && >> + !(args->flags & DRM_SYNCOBJ_HANDLE_TO_FD_FLAGS_EXPORT_SYNC_FILE) >> && >> + args->point) >> + return -EINVAL; > > Should it not be > > + if ((!(args->flags & DRM_SYNCOBJ_HANDLE_TO_FD_FLAGS_TIMELINE) || > + !(args->flags & DRM_SYNCOBJ_HANDLE_TO_FD_FLAGS_EXPORT_SYNC_FILE)) > && > + args->point) > + return -EINVAL; Yeah copy paste error. :)
