On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:11:52 +0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Proposal:
> Why don't you include a security register alongside the DMA registers. When
> the
> commands are DMAed in and proccessed any "priviliged" command encountered
> would
> either be turned into a no op or halt execution if the security register is
> set.
This is IMHO a no-issue. No unprivileged user space programm
should be able to insert anything directly into the graphic card w/o
the interception of a driver. Any priviledge checking and enforcing
has to be done in software as 1) it is impossible to forsee
how future OS will handle priviledges and 2) to keep the transistor
count down.
> Ideally an interrupt would be generated in both cases to let the
> user/programmer know.
Way to slow. An interrupt on every command (worst case if all
commands are priviledged) will nearly lock up the machine.
Beside, user space programs cannot register interrupt handlers.
> I don't know how this scheme maps to the kernel DRI
> security mechanisms. I haven't looked into the kernel source code for this. Im
> finding it a lot easier to understand the Xorg XAA code/design then the kernel
> header files.
Interesting, i find it the other way round :)
> I don't know what it does to the FPGA/transistor budget.
Horrible.
> PS. I hope the card will support native 3.3 V PCI. My SGI 320 refuses to boot
> if
> some so called "univseral" cards are placed in the slots.
Unlikely. But that's IMHO a SGI hardware bug, so let them fix it.
Attila Kinali
--
egp ist vergleichbar mit einem ikea bausatz fuer flugzeugtraeger
-- reeler in +kaosu
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
