RFC: what to do with ums when the X server is not suid root ?

Hans de Goede hdegoede at redhat.com
Mon Jan 20 15:48:55 UTC 2014


Hi,

On 01/20/2014 03:18 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:08:01AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>> So now it is time to start looking into some of the corner cases, or rather at
>> the elephant in the room. What about non-kms drivers. We still have the vesa
>> driver around as most prominent example, and this is useful for some oddball
>> cards and for cards which are too new.
>
> -mga is probably also still relevant in some small number of cases.

Don't we've a kms driver for those? Or you mean for mga cards not supported by
the kms driver?

> We can probably kill -cirrus. That would leave -openchrome, which I think
> is probably only really relevant for OLPC? What's the situation with the
> binary nvidia and amd drivers?

Oh, I completely did not think about the binary drivers yet. Ugh. AFAIK those
are not compatible with kms, so the helper for other ums drivers would just do
the right thing there since there would be no kms capable card to be found in /dev.

>> I would like to not break the vesa driver, while still killing the suid bit on
>> the X server.
>
> It's probably worth considering whether porting uvesafb to kms would be
> worthwhile, and then just using -modesetting.

Yes that is something I was thinking about too, that would be an interesting approach,
it would make it somewhat harder for people to use binary drivers, but not impossible.

And then we could simply forget about supporting ums at all I guess.

Regards,

Hans



More information about the devel mailing list