linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 20/20] drm/dp_mst: Convert drm_dp_mst_topology.c to drm_err()/drm

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:19:31 +0200
From:   Robert Foss <robert.foss@...aro.org>
To:     Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
Cc:     nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 20/20] drm/dp_mst: Convert drm_dp_mst_topology.c to drm_err()/drm_dbg*()

Hey Lyude,

This patch looks good, but I have one question below. With it
addressed, feel free to add my r-b.

Reviewed-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@...aro.org>

>
> -static bool drm_dp_sideband_parse_req(struct drm_dp_sideband_msg_rx *raw,
> +static bool drm_dp_sideband_parse_req(const struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr,
> +                                     struct drm_dp_sideband_msg_rx *raw,
>                                       struct drm_dp_sideband_msg_req_body *msg)
>  {
>         memset(msg, 0, sizeof(*msg));
> @@ -1117,12 +1125,12 @@ static bool drm_dp_sideband_parse_req(struct drm_dp_sideband_msg_rx *raw,
>
>         switch (msg->req_type) {
>         case DP_CONNECTION_STATUS_NOTIFY:
> -               return drm_dp_sideband_parse_connection_status_notify(raw, msg);
> +               return drm_dp_sideband_parse_connection_status_notify(mgr, raw, msg);
>         case DP_RESOURCE_STATUS_NOTIFY:
> -               return drm_dp_sideband_parse_resource_status_notify(raw, msg);
> +               return drm_dp_sideband_parse_resource_status_notify(mgr, raw, msg);
>         default:
> -               DRM_ERROR("Got unknown request 0x%02x (%s)\n", msg->req_type,
> -                         drm_dp_mst_req_type_str(msg->req_type));
> +               drm_err(mgr->dev, "Got unknown request 0x%02x (%s)\n",
> +                       msg->req_type, drm_dp_mst_req_type_str(msg->req_type));
>                 return false;
>         }
>  }
>

.. snip ..

> @@ -4118,12 +4121,12 @@ static int drm_dp_mst_handle_up_req(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr)
>
>         INIT_LIST_HEAD(&up_req->next);
>
> -       drm_dp_sideband_parse_req(&mgr->up_req_recv, &up_req->msg);
> +       drm_dp_sideband_parse_req(mgr, &mgr->up_req_recv, &up_req->msg);

drm_dp_sideband_parse_req() is only called here, and the function
arguments could probably stand to have `&mgr->up_req_recv` removed
(here and in the func. declaration) since the same data structure is
accessible through the `mgr` pointer inside of
drm_dp_sideband_parse_req(). I guess this is a matter of taste, so
feel free to do what you want with this.

>
>         if (up_req->msg.req_type != DP_CONNECTION_STATUS_NOTIFY &&
>             up_req->msg.req_type != DP_RESOURCE_STATUS_NOTIFY) {
> -               DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Received unknown up req type, ignoring: %x\n",
> -                             up_req->msg.req_type);
> +               drm_dbg_kms(mgr->dev, "Received unknown up req type, ignoring: %x\n",
> +                           up_req->msg.req_type);
>                 kfree(up_req);
>                 goto out;
>         }