On Wed, 06 Mar 2024, Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 12:04 PM Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> @@ -2764,58 +2764,71 @@ static u32 edid_extract_panel_id(const struct edid *edid)
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> - * drm_edid_get_panel_id - Get a panel's ID through DDC
>> - * @adapter: I2C adapter to use for DDC
>> + * drm_edid_get_panel_id - Get a panel's ID from EDID
>> + * @drm_edid: EDID that contains panel ID.
>> *
>> - * This function reads the first block of the EDID of a panel and (assuming
>> + * This function uses the first block of the EDID of a panel and (assuming
>> * that the EDID is valid) extracts the ID out of it. The ID is a 32-bit value
>> * (16 bits of manufacturer ID and 16 bits of per-manufacturer ID) that's
>> * supposed to be different for each different modem of panel.
>> *
>> + * Return: A 32-bit ID that should be different for each make/model of panel.
>> + * See the functions drm_edid_encode_panel_id() and
>> + * drm_edid_decode_panel_id() for some details on the structure of this
>> + * ID.
>> + */
>> +u32 drm_edid_get_panel_id(const struct drm_edid *drm_edid)
>> +{
>
> I'd leave it up to Jani, but I'd wonder whether we need to confirm
> drm_edid->size here is at least as big as the base block. In other
> words: is there ever any chance that someone would have allocated a
> struct drm_edid but not actually read a full base block into it?
On the one hand, I've tried to make all the drm_edid based interfaces
handle all the cases (drm_edid == NULL, drm_edid->edid == NULL,
drm_edid->size < required) gracefully, but on the other hand, panel-edp
is the only user and this would go boom for you quickly if you passed in
a bogus drm_edid.
Adding the checks is definitely not wrong, but I'm not insisting.
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> In any case:
>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
