[RFC PATCH 3/3] drm/file: drop DRM_MINOR_CONTROL

[Simon Ser]

On Friday, July 14th, 2023 at 16:28, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> wrote:

> Hi Simon
> 
> Am 14.07.23 um 12:46 schrieb Simon Ser:
> > This entry should never be used by the kernel. Record the historical
> > context in a comment.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Ser <contact at emersion.fr>
> > Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
> > Cc: James Zhu <James.Zhu at amd.com>
> > Cc: Marek Olšák <marek.olsak at amd.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
> > ---
> >   include/drm/drm_file.h | 4 +++-
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_file.h b/include/drm/drm_file.h
> > index 010239392adf..a23cc2f6163f 100644
> > --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h
> > +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h
> > @@ -53,12 +53,14 @@ struct file;
> >   /* Note that the values of this enum are ABI (it determines
> >    * /dev/dri/renderD* numbers).
> >    *
> > + * There used to be a DRM_MINOR_CONTROL = 1 entry, but such nodes were never
> > + * exposed. Still, some user-space has logic to handle them.
> > + *
> >    * Setting DRM_MINOR_ACCEL to 32 gives enough space for more drm minors to
> >    * be implemented before we hit any future
> >    */
> >   enum drm_minor_type {
> >   	DRM_MINOR_PRIMARY = 0,
> > -	DRM_MINOR_CONTROL = 1,
> 
> Maybe rather leave this line in and comment it with "// obsolete". 
> Otherwise someone might accidentally use 1 for something.

Yeah... That's why I added the comment. But maybe better to leave the entry
indeed, even if we risk someone accidentally using it.

> In any case
> 
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de>
> 
> for the whole series.

Thanks for the review!