[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZAYAbIXlLLkNCB6f@arch-x395>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 15:02:04 +0000
From: Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@...labora.com>
To: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>, Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansingh@...omium.org>,
Chia-I Wu <olvaffe@...il.com>,
Ryan Neph <ryanneph@...omium.org>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, kernel@...labora.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/virtio: Fix handling CONFIG_DRM_VIRTIO_GPU_KMS
option
On 2023/03/06, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> VirtIO-GPU got a new config option for disabling KMS. There were two
> problems left unnoticed during review when the new option was added:
>
> 1. The IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_VIRTIO_GPU_KMS) check in the code was
> inverted, hence KMS was disabled when it should be enabled and vice versa.
>
> 2. The disabled KMS crashed kernel with a NULL dereference in
> drm_kms_helper_hotplug_event(), which shall not be invoked with a
> disabled KMS.
>
> Fix the inverted config option check in the code and skip handling the
> VIRTIO_GPU_EVENT_DISPLAY sent by host when KMS is disabled in guest to fix
> the crash.
>
> Fixes: 72122c69d717 ("drm/virtio: Add option to disable KMS support")
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
> ---
>
> Changelog:
>
> v2: - Moved the "has_edid" under the "num_scanouts" condition, like was
> suggested by Gerd Hoffmann.
>
Hi Dmitry, I think there's more than one piece like that in the driver.
> drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_kms.c | 14 ++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_kms.c
> index 874ad6c2621a..15f2519988e7 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_kms.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_kms.c
> @@ -43,11 +43,13 @@ static void virtio_gpu_config_changed_work_func(struct work_struct *work)
> virtio_cread_le(vgdev->vdev, struct virtio_gpu_config,
> events_read, &events_read);
> if (events_read & VIRTIO_GPU_EVENT_DISPLAY) {
> - if (vgdev->has_edid)
> - virtio_gpu_cmd_get_edids(vgdev);
> - virtio_gpu_cmd_get_display_info(vgdev);
> - virtio_gpu_notify(vgdev);
> - drm_helper_hpd_irq_event(vgdev->ddev);
> + if (vgdev->num_scanouts) {
> + if (vgdev->has_edid)
> + virtio_gpu_cmd_get_edids(vgdev);
Worth doing the same thing in virtio_gpu_init()? Aka move the has_edid
&& get_edids within the num_scanouts if block.
HTH
Emil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists