linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/ssd130x: Use drm_atomic_get_new_plane

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: <7ccc4b30-0f85-6870-0c60-9897fdb374b9@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Sep 2022 11:16:00 +0200
From:   Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
To:     Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/ssd130x: Use drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state()

Hello Ville,

On 9/23/22 11:05, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 10:34:47AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> The struct drm_plane .state shouldn't be accessed directly but instead the
>> drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state() helper function should be used.
>>
>> This is based on a similar patch from Thomas Zimmermann for the simpledrm
>> driver. No functional changes.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
>

Thanks.
 
> I wonder how many naked obj->state dereferences are still
> left in places where they should be using the get_{new,old}()
> stuff. Might have to write a bit of cocci to find out...
> 
> 
> Btw on a somewhat related note, I've been thinking about bringing
> for_each_crtc_in_state() & co. back (got removed in commit
> 77ac3b00b131 ("drm/atomic: Remove deprecated accessor macros"))
> but this time without any object state iterator variable. Now that
> we're more often just plumbing the full atomic state through I
> think there are bunch of places that don't need the object state(s)
> within the loop at all, so having to have those variables around
> makes the whole thing a bit noisy. Also IIRC we had to add some
> (void) casts into the current macros to hide some compiler warnings
> about unused variables. Could get rid of at least some of those extra
> casts again.
> 
> I don't suppose there's anyone interested in doing that so I don't
> have to? ;)
> 

Maybe you can add an entry in Documentation/gpu/todo.rst, explaining
this and putting yourself as a contact? 

-- 
Best regards,

Javier Martinez Canillas
Core Platforms
Red Hat