lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] drm/sun4i: dsi: Prevent underflow when computing packet sizes
From
Date
On 8/14/22 2:55 AM, Jernej Škrabec wrote:
> Dne petek, 12. avgust 2022 ob 05:16:23 CEST je Samuel Holland napisal(a):
>> Currently, the packet overhead is subtracted using unsigned arithmetic.
>> With a short sync pulse, this could underflow and wrap around to near
>> the maximal u16 value. Fix this by using signed subtraction. The call to
>> max() will correctly handle any negative numbers that are produced.
>>
>> Apply the same fix to the other timings, even though those subtractions
>> are less likely to underflow.
>>
>> Fixes: 133add5b5ad4 ("drm/sun4i: Add Allwinner A31 MIPI-DSI controller
>> support") Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
>> ---
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun6i_mipi_dsi.c | 10 +++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun6i_mipi_dsi.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun6i_mipi_dsi.c index b4dfa166eccd..34234a144e87
>> 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun6i_mipi_dsi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun6i_mipi_dsi.c
>> @@ -522,77 +522,77 @@ static void sun6i_dsi_setup_format(struct sun6i_dsi
>> *dsi, SUN6I_DSI_PIXEL_PF1_CRC_INIT_LINE0(0xffff) |
>> SUN6I_DSI_PIXEL_PF1_CRC_INIT_LINEN(0xffff));
>>
>> regmap_write(dsi->regs, SUN6I_DSI_PIXEL_CTL0_REG,
>> SUN6I_DSI_PIXEL_CTL0_PD_PLUG_DISABLE |
>> SUN6I_DSI_PIXEL_CTL0_FORMAT(fmt));
>> }
>>
>> static void sun6i_dsi_setup_timings(struct sun6i_dsi *dsi,
>> struct drm_display_mode *mode)
>> {
>> struct mipi_dsi_device *device = dsi->device;
>> - unsigned int Bpp = mipi_dsi_pixel_format_to_bpp(device->format) / 8;
>> + int Bpp = mipi_dsi_pixel_format_to_bpp(device->format) / 8;
>
> Nit: mipi_dsi_pixel_format_to_bpp() can return -EINVAL in case of unsupported
> format. Would it make sense to check it?

The switch statement in mipi_dsi_pixel_format_to_bpp() handles every value in
the enumeration, so I think the -EINVAL is just there to keep GCC from
complaining. If we do want to handle this case, it would need to be in
sun6i_dsi_attach(), since the other places we use mipi_dsi_pixel_format_to_bpp()
are way too late to handle any errors.

Regards,
Samuel

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-14 19:55    [W:0.332 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site