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

[Alex Deucher]

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:
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