Re: maxHValue/maxVValue replacement?

2018-05-18 Thread Thomas Klausner 
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 12:48:57PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 08:34 +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > Some old drivers use maxHValue/maxVValue, which xorg-server-1.20.0
> > does not provide any longer. What is the proper replacement?
> 
> The only two I was able to find were mach64:
> 
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-mach64/commit/?id=e27785a3fbabc9f354c361b5058b0359b6d9b5ae
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-mach64/commit/?id=5ae03dc9f4564de54df6427ed7e6e80e75a4179e
> 
> And rendition:
> 
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-rendition/commit/?id=70dd6c22b8af58c415ee142468d19dc8b428fffd
> 
> I'll push out releases for those so there's something official to
> build against 1.20.

Thank you very much for these decidedly unboring releases ;)

I think the following drivers are affected by the same problem:

xf86-video-s3virge-1.10.7
xf86-video-savage-2.3.9
xf86-video-tseng-1.2.5

Can they please get maintenance releases as well?

Thank you,
 Thomas
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Re: maxHValue/maxVValue replacement?

2018-05-18 Thread Adam Jackson 
On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 08:34 +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> Some old drivers use maxHValue/maxVValue, which xorg-server-1.20.0
> does not provide any longer. What is the proper replacement?

The only two I was able to find were mach64:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-mach64/commit/?id=e27785a3fbabc9f354c361b5058b0359b6d9b5ae
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-mach64/commit/?id=5ae03dc9f4564de54df6427ed7e6e80e75a4179e

And rendition:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-rendition/commit/?id=70dd6c22b8af58c415ee142468d19dc8b428fffd

I'll push out releases for those so there's something official to
build against 1.20.

- ajax
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Re: [PATCH xserver 1/2] xfree86: Fix O_CLOEXEC usage in lnx_platform

2018-05-18 Thread Keith Packard 
Michel Dänzer  writes:

> From: Michel Dänzer 
>
> It was passing O_CLOEXEC as permission bits instead of as a flag.

Both are

Reviewed-by: Keith Packard 

-- 
-keith


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

[PATCH xserver 2/2] modesetting: Pass O_CLOEXEC when opening a DRM device

2018-05-18 Thread Michel Dänzer 
From: Michel Dänzer 

We don't want DRM file descriptors to leak to child processes.

Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer 
---
 hw/xfree86/drivers/modesetting/driver.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/xfree86/drivers/modesetting/driver.c 
b/hw/xfree86/drivers/modesetting/driver.c
index 5d8906d63..306541f33 100644
--- a/hw/xfree86/drivers/modesetting/driver.c
+++ b/hw/xfree86/drivers/modesetting/driver.c
@@ -200,12 +200,12 @@ open_hw(const char *dev)
 int fd;
 
 if (dev)
-fd = open(dev, O_RDWR, 0);
+fd = open(dev, O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC, 0);
 else {
 dev = getenv("KMSDEVICE");
-if ((NULL == dev) || ((fd = open(dev, O_RDWR, 0)) == -1)) {
+if ((NULL == dev) || ((fd = open(dev, O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC, 0)) == -1)) {
 dev = "/dev/dri/card0";
-fd = open(dev, O_RDWR, 0);
+fd = open(dev, O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC, 0);
 }
 }
 if (fd == -1)
-- 
2.17.0

___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

[PATCH xserver 1/2] xfree86: Fix O_CLOEXEC usage in lnx_platform

2018-05-18 Thread Michel Dänzer 
From: Michel Dänzer 

It was passing O_CLOEXEC as permission bits instead of as a flag.

Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer 
---
 hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_platform.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_platform.c 
b/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_platform.c
index 11af52c46..70374ace8 100644
--- a/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_platform.c
+++ b/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/lnx_platform.c
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ get_drm_info(struct OdevAttributes *attribs, char *path, int 
delayed_index)
 }
 
 if (fd == -1)
-fd = open(path, O_RDWR, O_CLOEXEC);
+fd = open(path, O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC, 0);
 
 if (fd == -1)
 return FALSE;
-- 
2.17.0

___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

maxHValue/maxVValue replacement?

2018-05-18 Thread Thomas Klausner 
Some old drivers use maxHValue/maxVValue, which xorg-server-1.20.0
does not provide any longer. What is the proper replacement?

Thanks,
 Thomas
___
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel