[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 14/19] drm/i915/oprom: Basic sanitization

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 08:04:32AM +0000, Gupta, Anshuman wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nikula, Jani <jani.nikula at intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, September 20, 2021 1:12 PM
>> To: De Marchi, Lucas <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
>> Cc: Auld, Matthew <matthew.auld at intel.com>; intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org;
>> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org; Gupta, Anshuman
>> <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 14/19] drm/i915/oprom: Basic sanitization
>>
>> On Fri, 17 Sep 2021, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 02:57:33PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >>On Mon, 12 Apr 2021, Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com> wrote:
>> >>> From: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>
>> >>>
>> >>> Sanitize OPROM header, CPD signature and OPROM PCI version.
>> >>> OPROM_HEADER, EXPANSION_ROM_HEADER and OPROM_MEU_BLOB
>> structures and
>> >>> PCI struct offsets are provided by GSC counterparts.
>> >>> These are yet to be Documented in B.Spec.
>> >>> After successful sanitization, extract VBT from opregion image.
>> >>
>> >>So I don't understand what the point is with two consecutive patches
>> >>where the latter rewrites a lot of the former.
>> >
>> > I actually wonder what's the point of this. Getting it from spi is
>> > already the fallback and looks much more complex. Yes, it's pretty
>> > detailed and document the format pretty well, but it still looks more
>> > complex than the initial code. Do you see additional benefit in this
>> > one?
>Getting opregion image from spi is needed to get the intel_opregion and its mailboxes on discrete card.
>>
>> The commit message doesn't really explain much. Anshuman?
>I will get rework of the patches and float it again.


from this patch the only thing I see it's doing is to get the VBT from
inside opregion... it moves the read part to helper methods and
apparently it supports multiple images...?

The question here is not why we are reading from spi, but rather what
this is doing that the previous commit wasn't already.

Lucas De Marchi