linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Avoid invalid rates

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]

Date:   Wed, 18 Dec 2019 14:41:58 -0800
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
        Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: Avoid invalid rates

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:03 PM Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > > +               for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sink_rates); i++) {
> > > +                       rate_times_200khz = le16_to_cpu(sink_rates[i]);
> > > +
> > > +                       if (!rate_times_200khz)
> > > +                               break;
> > > +
> > > +                       switch (rate_times_200khz) {
> > > +                       case 27000:
> >
> > maybe a bit bike-sheddy, but I kinda prefer to use traditional normal
> > units, ie. just multiply the returned value by 200 and adjust the
> > switch case values.  At least then they match the values in the lut
> > (other than khz vs mhz), which makes this whole logic a bit more
> > obvious... and at that point, maybe just loop over the lut table?
>
> (hit SEND too soon)
>
> and other than that, lgtm but haven't had a chance to test it yet
> (although I guess none of us have an eDP 1.4+ screen so maybe that is
> moot :-))

I think v3 should look much better to you.  I also added a note to the
commit log indicating that the DP 1.4 patch was only tested via
hackery...

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191218143416.v3.9.Ib59207b66db377380d13748752d6fce5596462c5@changeid

-Doug