lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180315102905.GB15393@ulmo>
Date:   Thu, 15 Mar 2018 11:29:05 +0100
From:   Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] drm/tegra: plane: Correct legacy blending

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 04:00:24AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> Keep old 'dependent' state of unaffected planes, this way new state takes
> into account current state of unaffected planes.
> 
> Fixes: ebae8d07435a ("drm/tegra: dc: Implement legacy blending")
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/plane.c | 15 ++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/plane.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/plane.c
> index fc37dcf8c458..3c0cb6a04c66 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/plane.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/plane.c
> @@ -287,13 +287,11 @@ unsigned int tegra_plane_format_adjust(unsigned int opaque)
>  	return opaque;
>  }
>  
> -unsigned int tegra_plane_get_overlap_index(struct tegra_plane *plane,
> -					   struct tegra_plane *other)
> +static unsigned int tegra_plane_get_overlap_index(struct tegra_plane *plane,
> +						  struct tegra_plane *other)

I'd prefer this to be a separate patch to keep the diff down to make
this easier to apply to v4.16. I can do that when I apply, no need to
resend.

>  {
>  	unsigned int index = 0, i;
>  
> -	WARN_ON(plane == other);
> -

Why would this need to go away? We still shouldn't be called with plane
== other because that makes no sense.

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ