| Message ID | 1348850159-3956-2-git-send-email-krh@bitplanet.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
if (type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL) {
base += 64;
- limit = base + 127;
+ limit = base + 64;
} else if (type == DRM_MINOR_RENDER) {
base += 128;
- limit = base + 255;
+ limit = base + 64;
If my first grade arithmetics serves me well, shouldn't limit in the first
clause be base + 63 and in the second clause, base + 127. The render
node starts at 128 and spans to 255, so there are total of 128 render
nodes, 64 card (legacy) nodes and 64 control nodes allowed.
Actually, this construction of limit relative to the base does not achieve
anything. The code would be much more readable if it were something like
this:
if (type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL) {
base = 64;
limit = 127;
} else if (type == DRM_MINOR_RENDER) {
base = 128;
limit = 255;
}
-- Ilija
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_stub.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_stub.c index 21bcd4a..d6d5160 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_stub.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_stub.c @@ -107,10 +107,10 @@ static int drm_minor_get_id(struct drm_device *dev, int type) if (type == DRM_MINOR_CONTROL) { base += 64; - limit = base + 127; + limit = base + 64; } else if (type == DRM_MINOR_RENDER) { base += 128; - limit = base + 255; + limit = base + 64; } again:
We got the minor number base right, but limit is too big and causes the minor numer ranges for the control and render nodes to overlap. Signed-off-by: Kristian Høgsberg <krh@bitplanet.net> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_stub.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)