On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:22:11PM GMT, Andi Shyti wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 07:55:10AM -0500, Lucas De Marchi wrote:On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 09:03:48AM GMT, Andi Shyti wrote: > Commit 05da7d9f717b ("drm/i915/gem: Downgrade stolen lmem setup > warning") returns '0' from i915_gem_stolen_lmem_setup(), but it's > supposed to return a pointer to the intel_memory_region > structure. > > Sparse complains with the following message: > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_stolen.c:943:32: sparse: sparse: > Using plain integer as NULL pointer > > The caller checks for errors, and if no error is returned, it > stores the address of the stolen memory. Therefore, we can't > return NULL. Since we are handling a case of out-of-bounds, it's > appropriate to treat the "lmem_size < dsm_base" case as an error. which completely invalidates the point of the commit that introduced this regression. That was commit was supposed to do "let's continue, just disabling stolen".Yes, correct, I missed the point while fixing stuff. But patch 2 is still valid.
no, it's not. It's introduced by the same commit. I went to look into this exactly because of the second issue: it broke 32b build in xe and all the CI.Hooks in xe are failing. Lucas De Marchi
Thanks, Andi
