It occurred to me that we never actually check this! So let's start
doing that.
Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c | 9 ++++++++-
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
index b9374c981a5b..ebffb834f5d6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_mst_topology.c
@@ -3538,7 +3538,7 @@ drm_dp_mst_atomic_check_topology_state(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr,
struct drm_dp_mst_topology_state *mst_state)
{
struct drm_dp_vcpi_allocation *vcpi;
- int avail_slots = 63, ret;
+ int avail_slots = 63, payload_count = 0, ret;
/* There's no possible scenario where releasing VCPI or keeping it the
* same would make the state invalid
@@ -3575,6 +3575,13 @@ drm_dp_mst_atomic_check_topology_state(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr,
goto port_fail;
}
+ if (++payload_count > mgr->max_payloads) {
+ DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("[MST MGR:%p] state %p has too many payloads (max=%d)\n",
+ mgr, mst_state, mgr->max_payloads);
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto port_fail;
+ }
+
drm_dp_mst_topology_put_port(vcpi->port);
}
DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("[MST MGR:%p] mst state %p VCPI avail=%d used=%d\n",
--
2.19.2
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
