[PATCH] mgag200: some cleanup and a fix for corrupted output

[Dave Airlie]

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Christopher Harvey <charvey at matrox.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:52:55AM -0500, Christopher Harvey wrote:
>> Patches 1 to 4 are just cleanup. Maybe these should should be rolled
>> into one patch?
>>
>> Patch 5 is a bit more complicated.
>> On cards with very little video memory, (e.g 8MB) higher resolutions
>> at 32bit framebuffer depths will get corrupted because the required
>> memory is larger than what the framebuffer has. DRM has "max_height"
>> and "max_width" but no "max_bytes" for limiting resolutions, so the
>> patch is a little hacky. The first for loop tries to associate a
>> connector with the mode being tested. From the connector I can get the
>> bpp if the user specified one on the video= commandline. After that I
>> do 2 things:
>>  1) Invalidate the requested mode from the video= parameter
>>  2) Return MODE_BAD if the framebuffer would be too large
>> I feel this patch plays with structures it shouldn't have to touch to
>> get the bpp. An alternative fix would be to include a "max_bytes" in
>> the DRM core and then do these checks there.
>>
>> I'm also wondering, did I miss the 3.9.0 merge window?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Christopher Harvey (5):
>>   drm/mgag200: Cleanup: Remove pointless call to drm_fb_get_bpp_depth
>>   drm/mgag200: Cleanup: 'fbdev_list' in 'struct mga_fbdev' is not used
>>   drm/mgag200: Cleanup: Pass driver specific mga_device in driver
>>     functions
>>   drm/mgag200: Cleanup: Remove extra variable assigns
>>   drm/mgag200: Reject modes that are too big for VRAM
>>
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.h  |  1 -
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_fb.c   |  3 ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_main.c |  2 --
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_mode.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  4 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> 1.7.12.4
>>
>
> Ping.
>
> I've got more patches queuing up. Should I re-submit these along with
> the new ones?
>
> So far I've only gotten commit message feedback.
>

Sorry been off sick, and this fell off my radar, I'll get to it today,
the first 4 seem fine,

I'll check the last one today., they all look like fixes so I can
probably merge them at any time.

Thanks,
Dave.