2013/9/13 Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 04:41:42PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013, Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:21:21PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> >> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013, Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > From: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> > >> >> > So far we control all the reads an none of them exceeds the current >> >> > limit of 20 bytes, but we never think about this when reviewing >> >> > patches, so we may at some point in the future overflow the buffer. >> >> > >> >> > My initial patch just added a WARN in case we were about to overflow >> >> > the buffer, but Chris suggested to make the size of the array dynamic. >> >> >> >> VLA on stack in kernel gives me an uneasy feeling, but I'll survive. >> > >> > IIRC sparse will complain about this. Might worth double checking. >> >> True. >> >> CHECK drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c:567:34: error: bad constant expression > > Also, > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/8/486 I just realized 20 bytes is really the maximum since we only have 5 data registers, so I'll bring back v1 of the patch, but with 2 additional checks: one spotted by Jani and one in intel_dp_aux_ch. > > -- > Damein -- Paulo Zanoni _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
