On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 07:54:46AM +0100, Peter Antoine wrote:
> This is a resubmission of the security fixed for a Kernel Crash found in the 
> drm part of the driver. It was caused by a attempt to Lock/Unlock a HW_LOCK
> that was uninitialised. As this feature is only required on some legacy 
> drivers
> this patchset now only turns these features off.
> 
> There is an igt test to follow, just working out a way of not crashing the
> systems that have this feature-set turned on (probably need to create a 
> context
> and if that succeeds then exit as the feature is on.
> 
> V2: Remove the patches that cover the Kernel Crash and the Lock Escalation.
>     Remove the PARAM that was used by the test to detect the presences of this
>     feature.

Process nit: When resending the entire patch series anew please start a
new thread. That avoids confusion with the discussion on the old patches
(I've managed to wreak havoc and merge a mix of old&new patches this way
already). in-reply-to resending is just for resending parts of the series
when you do a quick update of a patch.
-Daniel

> 
> Peter Antoine (2):
>   drm: Make HW_LOCK access functions optional.
>   drm: Make Legacy Context access functions optional.
> 
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_context.c         | 36 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c             | 12 +++++++-----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_lock.c            |  6 ++++++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_drm.c |  3 ++-
>  include/drm/drmP.h                    | 23 +++++++++++-----------
>  5 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to