Some users report hitting a divide by 0 with the tile split in certain apps. Tile_split shouldn't ever be 0 unless the surface structure was not properly initialized. I think there may be some cases where mesa uses an improperly initialized surface struct, but I haven't had time to track it down.
Bug: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72425
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher alexander.deucher@amd.com --- radeon/radeon_surface.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/radeon/radeon_surface.c b/radeon/radeon_surface.c index dcbbfdc..15127d4 100644 --- a/radeon/radeon_surface.c +++ b/radeon/radeon_surface.c @@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ static int eg_surface_init_2d(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man, tileb = tilew * tileh * bpe * surf->nsamples; /* slices per tile */ slice_pt = 1; - if (tileb > tile_split) { + if (tileb > tile_split && tile_split) { slice_pt = tileb / tile_split; } tileb = tileb / slice_pt; @@ -1621,7 +1621,7 @@ static int si_surface_init_2d(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man, tileb = tilew * tileh * bpe * surf->nsamples; /* slices per tile */ slice_pt = 1; - if (tileb > tile_split) { + if (tileb > tile_split && tile_split) { slice_pt = tileb / tile_split; } tileb = tileb / slice_pt; @@ -2223,7 +2223,7 @@ static int cik_surface_init_2d(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man,
/* slices per tile */ slice_pt = 1; - if (tileb > tile_split) { + if (tileb > tile_split && tile_split) { slice_pt = tileb / tile_split; tileb = tileb / slice_pt; }
Reviewed-by: Marek Olšák marek.olsak@amd.com
Marek
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Alex Deucher alexdeucher@gmail.com wrote:
Some users report hitting a divide by 0 with the tile split in certain apps. Tile_split shouldn't ever be 0 unless the surface structure was not properly initialized. I think there may be some cases where mesa uses an improperly initialized surface struct, but I haven't had time to track it down.
Bug: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72425
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher alexander.deucher@amd.com
radeon/radeon_surface.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/radeon/radeon_surface.c b/radeon/radeon_surface.c index dcbbfdc..15127d4 100644 --- a/radeon/radeon_surface.c +++ b/radeon/radeon_surface.c @@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ static int eg_surface_init_2d(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man, tileb = tilew * tileh * bpe * surf->nsamples; /* slices per tile */ slice_pt = 1;
- if (tileb > tile_split) {
- if (tileb > tile_split && tile_split) { slice_pt = tileb / tile_split; } tileb = tileb / slice_pt;
@@ -1621,7 +1621,7 @@ static int si_surface_init_2d(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man, tileb = tilew * tileh * bpe * surf->nsamples; /* slices per tile */ slice_pt = 1;
- if (tileb > tile_split) {
- if (tileb > tile_split && tile_split) { slice_pt = tileb / tile_split; } tileb = tileb / slice_pt;
@@ -2223,7 +2223,7 @@ static int cik_surface_init_2d(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man,
/* slices per tile */ slice_pt = 1;
- if (tileb > tile_split) {
- if (tileb > tile_split && tile_split) { slice_pt = tileb / tile_split; tileb = tileb / slice_pt; }
-- 1.8.3.1
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Die, 2013-12-10 at 12:42 -0500, Alex Deucher wrote:
Some users report hitting a divide by 0 with the tile split in certain apps. Tile_split shouldn't ever be 0 unless the surface structure was not properly initialized. I think there may be some cases where mesa uses an improperly initialized surface struct, but I haven't had time to track it down.
It would be good to know where the bogus tile split is coming from though — who knows what else might be wrong in that case?
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Michel Dänzer michel@daenzer.net wrote:
On Die, 2013-12-10 at 12:42 -0500, Alex Deucher wrote:
Some users report hitting a divide by 0 with the tile split in certain apps. Tile_split shouldn't ever be 0 unless the surface structure was not properly initialized. I think there may be some cases where mesa uses an improperly initialized surface struct, but I haven't had time to track it down.
It would be good to know where the bogus tile split is coming from though — who knows what else might be wrong in that case?
Agreed. The reporter updated the bug with the full backtrace, I just haven't had a chance to look at it yet. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72425
Alex
-- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-
Alex Deucher -
Marek Olšák -
Michel Dänzer