From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> The new >8k CEA modes have dotclocks reaching 5.94 GHz, which means our clock*1000 will now overflow the 32bit unsigned integer. Switch to 64bit maths to avoid it. Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- An interesting question how many other place might suffer from similar overflows. I think i915 should be mostly OK. The one place I know we use Hz instead kHz is the hsw DPLL code, which I would prefer we also change to use kHz. The other concern is whether we have any potential overflows before we check this against the platform's max dotclock. I do have this unreviewed igt series https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/69531/ which extends the current testing with some other forms of invalid modes. Could probably extend that with a mode.clock=INT_MAX test to see if anything else might trip up. No idea about other drivers. drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c index 501b4fe55a3d..511cde5c7fa6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c @@ -762,7 +762,7 @@ int drm_mode_vrefresh(const struct drm_display_mode *mode) if (mode->htotal == 0 || mode->vtotal == 0) return 0; - num = mode->clock * 1000; + num = mode->clock; den = mode->htotal * mode->vtotal; if (mode->flags & DRM_MODE_FLAG_INTERLACE) @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ int drm_mode_vrefresh(const struct drm_display_mode *mode) if (mode->vscan > 1) den *= mode->vscan; - return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(num, den); + return DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(mul_u32_u32(num, 1000), den); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_mode_vrefresh); -- 2.26.2 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
