On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 05:30:42PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:03 PM Ville Syrjala > <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > After much head scratching I managed to convince myself that > > for_each_displayid_db() has already done the bounds checks for > > the DispID CEA data block. Which is why we don't need to repeat > > them in cea_db_offsets(). To avoid having to go through that > > pain again in the future add a comment which explains this fact. > > > > Cc: Andres Rodriguez <andresx7@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c > > index 3df5744026b0..0369a54e3d32 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c > > @@ -4001,6 +4001,10 @@ cea_db_offsets(const u8 *cea, int *start, int *end) > > * no non-DTD data. > > */ > > if (cea[0] == DATA_BLOCK_CTA) { > > + /* > > + * for_each_displayid_db() has already verified > > + * that these stay within expected bounds. > > + */ > > I think the preferred format is to have the start of the comment be on > the first line after the /* with that fixed: Nope. > Acked-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx> > > > *start = 3; > > *end = *start + cea[2]; > > } else if (cea[0] == CEA_EXT) { > > -- > > 2.24.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Ville Syrjälä Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx