On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 04:12:23PM +0000, Gupta, Sourab wrote:
> 
> Hi Chris,
> 
> For the issue mentioned by you ( regarding botching up ioctls), we understand 
> that this is related to the 
> compatibility between the older/newer versions of driver/userspace.
> In our old implementation, the 'pad' field was replaced with 'flags' in the 
> ioctl structure. This would have 
> led to the erroneous behavior when the new userspace is communicating with 
> old driver.

You missed the important point that there is no guarrantee that current
userspace is not stuffing garbage into the pad field. It is.

You have to go with a new ioctl. So you may as well design one that
tries to fulfil today's varied needs for a constructor.  For example,
here's one I prepared earlier,
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ickle/linux-2.6/commit/?h=create2&id=401fa740adcaf252d0149cdd63d5fdf5e3969907
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to