Quoting Matthew Auld (2019-06-27 21:56:19) > From: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com> > > Done by returning -ENODEV from the map_gtt version ioctl. > > Cc: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenzi...@intel.com> > Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.a...@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c > index ac8fbada0406..34edc0302691 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c > @@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ static int i915_getparam_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, > void *data, > return value; > break; > case I915_PARAM_MMAP_GTT_VERSION: > + if (!HAS_MAPPABLE_APERTURE(dev_priv)) > + return -ENODEV;
The ioctl version is still going to be there, since we just extend it report offsets fot the many alternative mappings, with the different fences and everything. Right? If we don't support a ggtt mmap via the extended mmap_offset ioctl, we report the flags as being invalid. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
