[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Fix the confusing comment about the ioctl limits

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 02:39:51PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote:
> It was reported that this comment was confusing, and indeed it is.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau at intel.com>
> ---
>  include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> index ff57f07..eacd063 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
> @@ -171,8 +171,12 @@ typedef struct _drm_i915_sarea {
>  #define I915_BOX_TEXTURE_LOAD  0x8
>  #define I915_BOX_LOST_CONTEXT  0x10
>  
> -/* I915 specific ioctls
> - * The device specific ioctl range is 0x40 to 0x79.
> +/*
> + * i915 specific ioctls.
> + *
> + * The device specific ioctl range is [DRM_COMMAND_BASE, DRM_COMMAND_END) ie
> + * [0x40, 0xa0) (a0 is excluded) and those defines are offsets from
> + * DRM_COMMAND_BASE.

Maybe do the math for us and say what's the largest relative ioctl number
for i915?
-Daniel

>   */
>  #define DRM_I915_INIT		0x00
>  #define DRM_I915_FLUSH		0x01
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch