On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:19:54PM -0800, Jon Smirl wrote: > --- Eric Anholt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 12:25, Otto Solares wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 09:09:58PM -0800, Jon Smirl wrote: > > > > I currently have this info tacked onto the end of the statistics IOCTL > > (in > > > > order to conserve IOCTL numbers) but there should be a better way to do > > it. > > > > > > while you are on it, can you check why DRM_IOCTL_SET_UNIQUE ioctl does need > > root > > > privileges, it is more useful if access permissions could be managed via > > the > > > filesystem (eg. /dev/dri/cardX). > > > > You shouldn't use SET_UNIQUE any more. Do SET_VERSION to 1.1 and then > > get the unique (the busid). > > This doesn't need root priv, right? > > Also, I wrote code to add get FB/MMIO size/length via the GetValue IOCTL for > Radeon. Should I stick with a card specific IOCTL for this or do we want a > general one? It's only the radeon DSO that needs this info. > > GetValue also returns the IRQ # for radeon, not sure what the othe cards do. > GetIRQByBusID can probably easily be eliminated too. > > I'm starting to think that it might be possible to eliminate all need for root > priv but it will take significantly more work.
Jon, should i convert r200 in Mesa-newtree to use SET_VERSION and then GET_UNIQUE or there is more work to be done to eliminate root privs, is backwards compability an issue too? -solca ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
