On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 at 04:55, Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2022/5/18 15:57, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 18.05.2022 08:58, Hangyu Hua wrote:
> >> The next call to sii8620_burst_get_tx_buf will result in off-by-one
> >> When ctx->burst.tx_count + size == ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->burst.tx_buf). The
> >> same
> >> thing happens in sii8620_burst_get_rx_buf.
> >>
> >> This patch also change tx_count and tx_buf to rx_count and rx_buf in
> >> sii8620_burst_get_rx_buf. It is unreasonable to check tx_buf's size and
> >> use rx_buf.
> >>
> >> Fixes: e19e9c692f81 ("drm/bridge/sii8620: add support for burst eMSC
> >> transmissions")
> >> Signed-off-by: Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Regards
> > Andrzej
> >> ---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/sil-sii8620.c | 4 ++--
> >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/sil-sii8620.c
> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/sil-sii8620.c
> >> index ec7745c31da0..ab0bce4a988c 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/sil-sii8620.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/sil-sii8620.c
> >> @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static void *sii8620_burst_get_tx_buf(struct
> >> sii8620 *ctx, int len)
> >> u8 *buf = &ctx->burst.tx_buf[ctx->burst.tx_count];
> >> int size = len + 2;
> >> - if (ctx->burst.tx_count + size > ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->burst.tx_buf)) {
> >> + if (ctx->burst.tx_count + size >= ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->burst.tx_buf)) {
> >> dev_err(ctx->dev, "TX-BLK buffer exhausted\n");
> >> ctx->error = -EINVAL;
> >> return NULL;
> >> @@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ static u8 *sii8620_burst_get_rx_buf(struct sii8620
> >> *ctx, int len)
> >> u8 *buf = &ctx->burst.rx_buf[ctx->burst.rx_count];
> >> int size = len + 1;
> >> - if (ctx->burst.tx_count + size > ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->burst.tx_buf)) {
> >> + if (ctx->burst.rx_count + size >= ARRAY_SIZE(ctx->burst.rx_buf)) {
> >> dev_err(ctx->dev, "RX-BLK buffer exhausted\n");
> >> ctx->error = -EINVAL;
> >> return NULL;
> >
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Another patches for this module that I submitted at the same time as
> this one have been merged. Is this patch forgotten to merge?
Applied to drm-misc-next.
