search for: num_slot

...t, vcpi); > + if (vcpi) { > + port = container_of(vcpi, struct drm_dp_mst_port, > + vcpi); > port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); > if (!port) { > mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); > return -EINVAL; > } > - req_payload.num_slots = mgr->proposed_vcpis[i]->num_slots; > - req_payload.vcpi = mgr->proposed_vcpis[i]->vcpi; > + req_payload.num_slots = vcpi->num_slots; > + req_payload.vcpi = vcpi->vcpi; > } else { > port = NULL; > req_payload.num_slots = 0; > } > &gt...

...->proposed_vcpis[i], struct drm_dp_mst_port, vcpi); + if (vcpi) { + port = container_of(vcpi, struct drm_dp_mst_port, + vcpi); port = drm_dp_get_validated_port_ref(mgr, port); if (!port) { mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); return -EINVAL; } - req_payload.num_slots = mgr->proposed_vcpis[i]->num_slots; - req_payload.vcpi = mgr->proposed_vcpis[i]->vcpi; + req_payload.num_slots = vcpi->num_slots; + req_payload.vcpi = vcpi->vcpi; } else { port = NULL; req_payload.num_slots = 0; } - mgr->payloads[i].start_slot = req_pay...

...= drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, > - port); > - if (!port) { > - mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); > - return -EINVAL; > + > + /* Validated ports don't matter if we're releasing > + * VCPI > + */ > + if (vcpi->num_slots) { > + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated( > + mgr, port); > + if (!port) { > + mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + put_port = true; > } > + > req_payload.num_slots = vcpi->num_slots;...

...ct drm_dp_mst_port, vcpi); - port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, - port); - if (!port) { - mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); - return -EINVAL; + + /* Validated ports don't matter if we're releasing + * VCPI + */ + if (vcpi->num_slots) { + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated( + mgr, port); + if (!port) { + mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); + return -EINVAL; + } + put_port = true; } + req_payload.num_slots = vcpi->num_slots; req_payload.vcpi = vcpi->vcpi; } else {...

...b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > index ad0fb6d003be..9b1b5c9b1fa0 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c > @@ -1896,9 +1896,7 @@ int drm_dp_update_payload_part1(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr) > req_payload.num_slots = 0; > } > > - if (mgr->payloads[i].start_slot != req_payload.start_slot) { > - mgr->payloads[i].start_slot = req_payload.start_slot; > - } > + mgr->payloads[i].start_slot = req_payload.start_slot; Entertaining! Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at...

...ct drm_dp_mst_port, vcpi); - port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, - port); - if (!port) { - mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); - return -EINVAL; + + /* Validated ports don't matter if we're releasing + * VCPI + */ + if (vcpi->num_slots) { + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated( + mgr, port); + if (!port) { + mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); + return -EINVAL; + } + put_port = true; } + req_payload.num_slots = vcpi->num_slots; req_payload.vcpi = vcpi->vcpi; } else {...

...- for (i = 0; i < mstm->mgr.max_payloads; i++) { - struct drm_dp_payload *payload = &mstm->mgr.payloads[i]; - NV_ATOMIC(drm, "%s: %d: vcpi %d start 0x%02x slots 0x%02x\n", - mstm->outp->base.base.name, i, payload->vcpi, - payload->start_slot, payload->num_slots); - } - - for (i = 0; i < mstm->mgr.max_payloads; i++) { - struct drm_dp_payload *payload = &mstm->mgr.payloads[i]; - if (payload->vcpi == vcpi) - return payload; - } - - return NULL; -} - static void nv50_msto_cleanup(struct nv50_msto *msto) { struct nouveau_drm *drm = no...

This is a WIP version of the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream

...rm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c index ad0fb6d003be..9b1b5c9b1fa0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c @@ -1896,9 +1896,7 @@ int drm_dp_update_payload_part1(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr) req_payload.num_slots = 0; } - if (mgr->payloads[i].start_slot != req_payload.start_slot) { - mgr->payloads[i].start_slot = req_payload.start_slot; - } + mgr->payloads[i].start_slot = req_payload.start_slot; /* work out what is required to happen with this payload */ if (mgr->payloads[i].num...

Add online resize in tunefs.ocfs2 so that user can increase the volume when it is mounted.

...9,31 @@ static int fs_protocol_compare(struct ocfs2_protocol_version *existing, return 0; } +static void user_recover_prep(void *arg) +{ +} + +static void user_recover_slot(void *arg, struct dlm_slot *slot) +{ +} + +static void user_recover_done(void *arg, struct dlm_slot *slots, + int num_slots, int our_slot, + uint32_t generation) +{ +} + +const struct dlm_lockspace_ops ocfs2_ls_ops = { + .recover_prep = user_recover_prep, + .recover_slot = user_recover_slot, + .recover_done = user_recover_done, +}; + static int user_cluster_connect(struct ocfs2_cluster_connection *conn) { d...

...ort_ref(mgr, port); + port = drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port_validated(mgr, + port); if (!port) { mutex_unlock(&mgr->payload_lock); return -EINVAL; @@ -1925,7 +1935,7 @@ int drm_dp_update_payload_part1(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr) cur_slots += req_payload.num_slots; if (port) - drm_dp_put_port(port); + drm_dp_mst_topology_put_port(port); } for (i = 0; i < mgr->max_payloads; i++) { @@ -2024,7 +2034,7 @@ static int drm_dp_send_dpcd_write(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, struct drm_dp_sideband_msg_tx *txmsg; struct drm_dp_mst_branch...

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

So we don't ever have to worry about drivers touching drm_dp_mst_port structs without verifying them and crashing again. Lyude Paul (6): drm/dp_mst: Add drm_dp_get_payload_info() drm/nouveau: Use drm_dp_get_payload_info() for getting payload/vcpi drm/nouveau: Stop reading port->mgr in nv50_mstc_get_modes() drm/nouveau: Stop reading port->mgr in nv50_mstc_detect() drm/dp_mst:

...ercept.h Thu Jun 30 03:20:48 2005 +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/vmx_intercept.h Thu Jun 30 04:08:50 2005 @@ -1,4 +1,3 @@ - #ifndef _VMX_INTERCEPT_H #define _VMX_INTERCEPT_H @@ -13,18 +12,45 @@ typedef int (*intercept_action_t)(ioreq_t*); +enum {PORTIO, MMIO}; + struct vmx_handler_t { int num_slot; struct { unsigned long addr; + int type; unsigned long offset; intercept_action_t action; } hdl_list[MAX_IO_HANDLER]; }; /* global io interception point in HV */ -extern int vmx_io_intercept(ioreq_t*); -extern int register_io_handler(uns...

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

Hi, this is the next version of quota support for quota tools. I've addressed all the comments of Tao, Joel and others. Sparse feature disabling also correctly updates quota information now and the patch is merged into the tunefs support patch. Honza

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 04:35:47PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > There has been a TODO waiting for quite a long time in > drm_dp_mst_topology.c: > > /* We cannot rely on port->vcpi.num_slots to update > * topology_state->avail_slots as the port may not exist if the parent > * branch device was unplugged. This should be fixed by tracking > * per-port slot allocation in drm_dp_mst_topology_state instead of > * depending on the caller to tell us how many slots to r...