On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:03 PM Ville Syrjala ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com wrote:
From: Ville Syrjälä ville.syrjala@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@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä ville.syrjala@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@amd.com
*start = 3; *end = *start + cea[2]; } else if (cea[0] == CEA_EXT) {-- 2.24.1
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel