Hi,
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 5:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:14 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Douglas,
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 6:22 PM Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > In the commit bac9c2948224 ("drm/edid: Break out reading block 0 of
> > > the EDID") I broke out reading the base block of the EDID to its own
> > > function. Unfortunately, when I did that I messed up the handling when
> > > drm_edid_is_zero() indicated that we had an EDID that was all 0x00 or
> > > when we went through 4 loops and didn't get a valid EDID. Specifically
> > > I needed to pass the broken EDID to connector_bad_edid() but now I was
> > > passing an error-pointer.
> > >
> > > Let's re-jigger things so we can pass the bad EDID in properly.
> > >
> > > Fixes: bac9c2948224 ("drm/edid: Break out reading block 0 of the EDID")
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The crash is was seeing is gone, so
> > Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for testing! I'll plan to apply tomorrow morning (California
> time) to balance between giving folks a chance to yell at me for my
> patch and the urgency of fixing the breakage.
Ah, doh! I can't push until I can get a review tag from someone. As
soon as I see one then I'll give it a push.
-Doug
