[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/8] drm/edid: Document why we don't bounds check the DispID CEA block start/end

Shankar, Uma uma.shankar at intel.com
Mon Feb 3 19:58:38 UTC 2020



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Ville Syrjälä
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 5:14 PM
> To: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher at gmail.com>
> Cc: Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>; Andres Rodriguez
> <andresx7 at gmail.com>; Maling list - DRI developers <dri-
> devel at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] drm/edid: Document why we don't bounds check the
> DispID CEA block start/end
> 
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 05:30:42PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:03 PM Ville Syrjala
> > <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > >
> > > After much head scratching I managed to convince myself that
> > > for_each_displayid_db() has already done the bounds checks for the
> > > DispID CEA data block. Which is why we don't need to repeat them in
> > > cea_db_offsets(). To avoid having to go through that pain again in
> > > the future add a comment which explains this fact.
> > >
> > > Cc: Andres Rodriguez <andresx7 at gmail.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 4 ++++
> > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > > index 3df5744026b0..0369a54e3d32 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > > @@ -4001,6 +4001,10 @@ cea_db_offsets(const u8 *cea, int *start, int *end)
> > >          *   no non-DTD data.
> > >          */
> > >         if (cea[0] == DATA_BLOCK_CTA) {
> > > +               /*
> > > +                * for_each_displayid_db() has already verified
> > > +                * that these stay within expected bounds.
> > > +                */
> >
> > I think the preferred format is to have the start of the comment be on
> > the first line after the /* with that fixed:
> 
> Nope.

Yes the style is correct here, comment is apt as well.
Reviewed-by: Uma Shankar <uma.shankar at intel.com>

> > Acked-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher at amd.com>
> >
> > >                 *start = 3;
> > >                 *end = *start + cea[2];
> > >         } else if (cea[0] == CEA_EXT) {
> > > --
> > > 2.24.1
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dri-devel mailing list
> > > dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
> 
> --
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list