On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 03:24 +0300, Aapo Tahkola wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:48:11 -0400 > Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 2005-06-26 at 18:05 -0700, Eric Anholt wrote: > > > On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 01:19 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > > > Disagree also about axing the comment - its useful to know why something > > > > is being done. > > > > > > Wait, the comment says "TODO: Remove this; we can't afford to let > > > userspace control something that locks up the graphics card so easily." > > > We're not removing the code being referred to, as far as I've heard, and > > > "we can't afford" is contradictory to what we have agreed on for DRI > > > policy (drivers can't escalate privelege, but can hang the machine). > > > > When did this 'agreement' occur? I can't remember agreeing to that. That > > we may not be able to prevent all such cases doesn't mean we shouldn't > > prevent the ones we can. > > Without VPU recovery, it is very likely that the prices would be too high > to stand.
I really mean 'the ones we can'. All I'm saying is that we should try to prevent it whenever reasonably possible and that the fact that it may not always be is IMHO a bad excuse for never trying. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Libre software enthusiast | http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
