On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 09:01:46AM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:04:05 +0200
> ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Help drivers a little by guaranteeing that crtc_x+crtc_w and
> > crtc_y+crtc_h don't overflow.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
> > index 098cc50..2410a9a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
> > @@ -1725,6 +1725,18 @@ int drm_mode_setplane(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > goto out;
> > }
> >
> > + /* Give drivers some help against integer overflows */
> > + if (plane_req->crtc_w > INT_MAX ||
> > + plane_req->crtc_x > INT_MAX - (int32_t) plane_req->crtc_w ||
> > + plane_req->crtc_h > INT_MAX ||
> > + plane_req->crtc_y > INT_MAX - (int32_t) plane_req->crtc_h) {
> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Invalid CRTC coordinates %ux%u+%d+%d\n",
> > + plane_req->crtc_w, plane_req->crtc_h,
> > + plane_req->crtc_x, plane_req->crtc_y);
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > ret = plane->funcs->update_plane(plane, crtc, fb,
> > plane_req->crtc_x, plane_req->crtc_y,
> > plane_req->crtc_w, plane_req->crtc_h,
>
> Not sure this helps much in practice, since the drivers will have to
> validate the target CRTC rect against the actual pipe dimensions anyway.
My master plan is that drivers would just stick these into a drm_region
(introduced in my other patchset) and clip that to the pipe dimensions.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
