> On 28. Feb 2022, at 12:20, Greg KH wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:18PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
>> If the list does not contain the expected element, the value of
>> list_for_each_entry() iterator will not point to a valid structure.
>> To avoid type confusion in such case, the
> On 28. Feb 2022, at 12:24, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:17PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
>> b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
>> index 9040a0561466..0fd0307bc07b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
The list iterator variable will be a bogus pointer if no break was hit.
Dereferencing it could load *any* out-of-bounds/undefined value
making it unsafe to use that in the comparision to determine if the
specific element was found.
This is fixed by using a separate list iterator variable for the
If the list does not contain the expected element, the value of
list_for_each_entry() iterator will not point to a valid structure.
To avoid type confusion in such case, the list iterator
scope will be limited to list_for_each_entry() loop.
In preparation to limiting scope of a list iterator to
From: Arnd Bergmann
During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
introduce many other features, most of these are already
This is a bit more work (and a lot more noise), but I'd prefer if
this were split into as many patches as there are components.
I'm not going to review the parts of the patches that don't concern me,
and if something turns out to be a problem later one (it shouldn't but
one never knows) it'll be
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 1:36 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> >
> > One minor issue that remains is an added gcc warning for shifts of
> > negative integers when building with -Werror, which happens with the
> > 'make W=1' option, as well as for three drivers in the kernel that always
> > enable -Werror,
The list iterator value will *always* be set by list_for_each_entry().
It is incorrect to assume that the iterator value will be NULL if the
list is empty.
Instead of checking the pointer it should be checked if
the list is empty.
In acpi_get_pmu_hw_inf() instead of setting the pointer to NULL
on
If the list representing the request queue does not contain the expected
request, the value of list_for_each_entry() iterator will not point to a
valid structure. To avoid type confusion in such case, the list iterator
scope will be limited to list_for_each_entry() loop.
In preparation to
[ +arm64 maintainers for their awareness, which would have been a good
thing to do from the start ]
On 2022-02-25 03:24, Michael Cheng wrote:
Add arm64 support for drm_clflush_virt_range. caches_clean_inval_pou
performs a flush by first performing a clean, follow by an invalidation
operation.
Hi Arnd,
This is great!
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop.
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:04 AM Alex Elder wrote:
> On 2/27/22 3:52 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: From: Arnd Bergmann
> > I put the suggestion into patch form, based on what we discussed
> > in the thread. I only gave it minimal testing, but it would
> > be good to have it in linux-next if we want
When list_for_each_entry() completes the iteration over the whole list
without breaking the loop, the iterator value will be a bogus pointer
computed based on the head element.
While it is safe to use the pointer to determine if it was computed
based on the head element, either with
On 2/27/22 3:52 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
From: Arnd Bergmann
During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
introduce many
On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 11:00, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
>
> Hi Suraj,
>
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 05:10:06AM +, Kandpal, Suraj wrote:
> > Hi Abhinav,
> >
> > > Based on the discussion in this thread [1] , it seems like having
> > > drm_encoder
> > > as a pointer seems to have merits for both
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 6:32 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> From: Arnd Bergmann
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later
When list_for_each_entry() completes the iteration over the whole list
without breaking the loop, the iterator value will *always* be a bogus
pointer computed based on the head element.
To avoid type confusion use the actual list head directly instead of last
iterator value.
Signed-off-by: Jakob
On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 11:36 PM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> And I don't want somebody with a newer compiler version to not notice
> that he or she ended up using a c17 feature, just because _that_
> compiler supported it, and then other people get build errors because
> their compilers use gnu11
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:25 PM Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > Nathan Chancellor reported an additional -Wdeclaration-after-statement
> > warning that appears in a system header on arm, this still needs a
> > workaround.
>
> FWIW, I
On Tue, 2022-02-22 at 17:14 +, Patchwork wrote:
> Patch Details
> Series:drm/i915: Clarify vma lifetime
> (rev2)URL:https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/99948/State:failur
> e
> Details:https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_22350/index.html
> CI Bug Log - changes from
== Series Details ==
Series: Fix prime_mmap to work when using LMEM (rev2)
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/100737/
State : warning
== Summary ==
$ dim sparse --fast origin/drm-tip
Sparse version: v0.6.2
Fast mode used, each commit won't be checked separately.
Hello,
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 02:28:27PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 02:09:15PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 10:27:59AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 7:41 AM Jani
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 02:01:06PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 1:36 PM Jani Nikula
> wrote:
> > >
> > > One minor issue that remains is an added gcc warning for shifts of
> > > negative integers when building with -Werror, which happens with the
> > > 'make W=1' option,
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 01:03:36PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> >> @@ -954,7 +957,6 @@ net2272_dequeue(struct usb_ep *_ep, struct usb_request
> >> *_req)
> >>dev_dbg(ep->dev->dev, "unlink (%s) pio\n", _ep->name);
> >>net2272_done(ep, req, -ECONNRESET);
> >>}
> >> -
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:18PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
> b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
> index 4ee578b181da..a8cbd90db9d2 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c
> @@ -1060,26
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:22PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/tid_rdma.c
> b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/tid_rdma.c
> index 2a7abf7a1f7f..a069847b56aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/tid_rdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/tid_rdma.c
> @@
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann
>
>
> Link:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wiych7xehcmifj-ygxuy2jaj7pnkdkpcovt8fybvfw...@mail.gmail.com/
> Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1603
> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds
> Cc:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later standards
>
Exercise each of the migration scenarios, verifying that the final
placement and buffer contents match our expectations.
v2(Thomas): Replace for_i915_gem_ww() block with simpler object_lock()
v3:
- For testing purposes allow forcing the io_size such that we can
exercise the allocation +
If we have to contend with non-mappable LMEM, then we need to ensure the
object fits within the mappable portion, like in the selftests, where we
later try to CPU access the pages. However if it can't then we need to
gracefully handle this, without throwing an error.
Also it looks like TTM will
The end goal is to have userspace tell the kernel what buffers will
require CPU access, however if we ever reach the CPU fault handler, and
the current resource is not mappable, then we should attempt to migrate
the buffer to the mappable portion of LMEM, or even system memory, if the
allowable
If we need to make room for some mappable object, then we should
only victimize objects that have one or pages that occupy the visible
portion of LMEM. Let's also create a new priority hint for objects that
are placed in mappable memory, where we know that CPU access was
requested, that way we
Hi Jani,
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 02:09:15PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 10:27:59AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 7:41 AM Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 02 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >> > > On
On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 10:27:59AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 7:41 AM Jani Nikula wrote:
>> > On Wed, 02 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 03:15:03PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> > >>
Mark actually has a tree that switches to gnu99 with a lot of the
issues already sortd out and keeping sane default for things like the
absolutely horrible declarations in the middle of code here:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:19PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> The list iterator value will *always* be set by list_for_each_entry().
> It is incorrect to assume that the iterator value will be NULL if the
> list is empty.
>
> Instead of checking the pointer it should be checked if
> the list
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:17PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
> b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
> index 9040a0561466..0fd0307bc07b 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/at91_udc.c
> @@ -150,13 +150,14
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:18PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> If the list does not contain the expected element, the value of
> list_for_each_entry() iterator will not point to a valid structure.
> To avoid type confusion in such case, the list iterator
> scope will be limited to
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann
>
> During a patch discussion, Linus brought up the option of changing
> the C standard version from gnu89 to gnu99, which allows using variable
> declaration inside of a for() loop. While the C99, C11 and later
On 2022-02-28 10:10:48 [+], Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> Could you paste a link to the queue of i915 patches pending for a quick
> overview of how much work there is and in what areas?
Last post to the list:
Hi Vivek,
On 27/02/2022 17:29, Vivek Kasireddy wrote:
This iterator relies on drm_mm_first_hole() and drm_mm_next_hole()
functions to identify suitable holes for an allocation of a given
size by efficiently traversing the rbtree associated with the given
allocator.
It replaces the for loop
On 25/02/2022 17:58, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 05:41:17PM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin
Use lockdep_assert_not_held to simplify and correct the code. Otherwise
false positive are hit if lock state is uknown like after a previous
taint.
Signed-off-by:
Hi,
On 25/02/2022 23:03, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 2022-02-14 19:59:08 [+0100], To intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org wrote:
There are a few sections in the driver which are not compatible with
PREEMPT_RT. They trigger warnings and can lead to deadlocks at runtime.
Disable the i915
Psr_debug has already similar functionality you are introducing here.
Values we used there are different. Maybe we should consider dropping
that setting? Still for this patch:
Reviewed-by: Jouni Högander
On Thu, 2022-02-24 at 12:25 -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> Some users are suffering
Hi Dmitry,
On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:07:41AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 11:00, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 05:10:06AM +, Kandpal, Suraj wrote:
> > > Hi Abhinav,
> > >
> > > > Based on the discussion in this thread [1] , it seems like
Hi Rob,
On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 10:27:59AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 7:41 AM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Wed, 02 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 03:15:03PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 02 Feb 2022, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > >> >
Hi Suraj,
On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 05:10:06AM +, Kandpal, Suraj wrote:
> Hi Abhinav,
>
> > Based on the discussion in this thread [1] , it seems like having
> > drm_encoder
> > as a pointer seems to have merits for both of us and also in agreement with
> > the folks on this thread and has a
101 - 147 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
