Re: Weirdness in parsing cpp macros

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Julia Lawall wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> Okay, I have another one wrt macros. :) > >> > >> I'm trying to add a completely new variadic macro, but it fails at > &

Re: Weirdness in parsing cpp macros

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Julia Lawall wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> Okay, I have another one wrt macros. :) > >> > >> I'm trying to add a completely new variadic macro, but it fails at > &

Re: Weirdness in parsing cpp macros

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 02:24:08PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Julia et al

Re: Weirdness in parsing cpp macros

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > Hi Julia et al, > > In Linux drm/i915 driver (drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.[ch]) > we have a magic macro like this: > > #define with_intel_pps_lock(dp, wf) \ Did you try declaring: iterator name with_intel_pps_lock; up with the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH RFC v1 00/52] drm/crtc: Rename struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev

On Wed, 12 Jul 2023, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:46:33PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > > Am 12.07.23 um 11:46 schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > > > Hello, > > > > > > while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly > > > irritated about struct drm_device

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 16/24] drm/i915/gvt: use vmalloc_array and vcalloc

t:ocaml(alloc) { rename alloc }; @@ ( alloc(x1*x2*x3) | alloc(C1 * C2) | alloc((sizeof(t)) * (COUNT), ...) | - alloc((e1) * (e2)) + realloc(e1, e2) | - alloc((e1) * (COUNT)) + realloc(COUNT, e1) | - alloc((E1) * (E2)) + realloc(E1, E2) ) // Signed-o

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 00/24] use vmalloc_array and vcalloc

The functions vmalloc_array and vcalloc were introduced in commit a8749a35c399 ("mm: vmalloc: introduce array allocation functions") but are not used much yet. This series introduces uses of these functions, to protect against multiplication overflows. The changes were done using the following

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 16/26] drm/i915/gvt: use array_size

) + array_size(E1, E2) ,...) ) // Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c |6 -- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gtt.c index 4ec85308379a..df52385ad436 100644

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/26] use array_size

Use array_size to protect against multiplication overflows. This follows up on the following patches by Kees Cook from 2018. 42bc47b35320 ("treewide: Use array_size() in vmalloc()") fad953ce0b22 ("treewide: Use array_size() in vzalloc()") The changes were done using the following Coccinelle

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/fbc: Avoid full proxy f_ops for FBC debug attributes

> Hi Julia, thanks for helping here. > > So, my question is why this > > make coccicheck M=drivers/gpu/drm/i915/ MODE=context > COCCI=./scripts/coccinelle/api/debugfs/debugfs_simple_attr.cocci > > didn't catch this chunck: > > - debugfs_create_file("i915_fbc_false_color", 0644,

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/fbc: Avoid full proxy f_ops for FBC debug attributes

On Tue, 3 Jan 2023, Deepak R Varma wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 06:18:12AM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 11:36:13PM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 12:13:56PM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 01:30:53PM +0530,

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix typos in comments

Spelling mistakes (triple letters) in comments. Detected with the help of Coccinelle. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_color.c |2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c |2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 18/22] drm/i915: Use drm_mode_init() for on-stack modes

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 10:00:06AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Feb 2022, Ville Syrjala wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > > > Initialize on-stack modes with drm_mode_init() to guarantee > > > no stack garbage in the list head, or

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add ww context to intel_dpt_pin (fwd)

, because vma has already been tested. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 09:14:18 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: kbu...@lists.01.org Cc: l...@intel.com, Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add ww context to intel_dpt_pin CC: kbuild

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 18/27] drm/i915/pxp: Implement funcs to create the TEE channel (fwd)

See line 81. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:48:16 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: kbu...@lists.01.org Cc: l...@intel.com, Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 18/27] drm/i915/pxp: Implement funcs to create the TEE channel CC: kbuild

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/27] drm/i915/pxp: Read register to check hardware session state (fwd)

Hello, Line 203 is clearly incorrect. Please check lines 97, 123, and 171 as well. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 01:12:07 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: kbu...@lists.01.org Cc: l...@intel.com, Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/27] drm

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/27] drm/i915/pxp: Enable ioctl action to set the ring3 context (fwd)

Hello, There is a problem on line 21 if i915 can actually be NULL. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2020 19:03:47 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: kbu...@lists.01.org Cc: l...@intel.com, Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/27] drm/i915/pxp: Enable

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFT drm/i915: Try setting the engine wa_list from the ring (fwd)

Hello, It looks like an unlock is missing on line 1279. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 03:36:18 +0800 From: kbuild test robot To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFT drm/i915: Try setting the engine wa_list from

Re: [Intel-gfx] [CI v12 10/23] drm/i915/dsc: Define & Compute VESA DSC params (fwd)

On Wed, 28 Nov 2018, Manasi Navare wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:46:26AM +0000, Julia Lawall wrote: > > Hello, > > > > row_index and column_index are unsigned, so in the last line shown > > they will not be less than 0. > > > > Row_index and column_i

Re: [Intel-gfx] [CI v12 10/23] drm/i915/dsc: Define & Compute VESA DSC params (fwd)

Hello, row_index and column_index are unsigned, so in the last line shown they will not be less than 0. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 19:43:30 +0800 From: kbuild test robot To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [CI v12 10/23] drm

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC 2/3] drm/i915: Prefer IS_GEN check with bitmask.

On Fri, 26 Oct 2018, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:11:57PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 25 Oct 2018, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 04:41:06PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > > On Wed,

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC 2/3] drm/i915: Prefer IS_GEN check with bitmask.

On Thu, 25 Oct 2018, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 04:41:06PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 01:22:57PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 04:36:19PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > > Whenever possible we should stick with IS_GEN

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm: fix call_kern.cocci warnings (fwd)

The containing function is called with a spin_lock held, so GFP_KERNEL can't be used. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 17:14:25 +0800 From: kbuild test robot To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall Subject: [PATCH] drm: fix call_kern.cocci warnings CC: kbuild

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC 2/3] drm/i915: Prefer IS_GEN check with bitmask.

> I wish it would look something more like this: > > @@ > identifier old=~ "^INTEL_GEN$"; > expression exp; > constant gen; > fresh identifier new = "IS_GEN" ## gen; > @@ > - old(exp) == gen > + new(exp) > > But coccinelle doesn't seem to accept the constant in the fresh > identifier

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/dp_mst: Introduce drm_dp_mst_connector_atomic_check() (fwd)

From: kbuild test robot To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] drm/dp_mst: Introduce drm_dp_mst_connector_atomic_check() CC: kbuild-...@01.org In-Reply-To: <20180918230637.20700-2-ly...@redhat.com> References: <20180918230637.20700-2-ly...@redhat.com> TO: Ly

[Intel-gfx] [drm-intel:drm-intel-next-queued 13/14] drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c:230:12-17: WARNING: Unsigned expression compared with zero: level < 0 (fwd)

Level is unsigned, so not less than 0 (line 230). julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:39:16 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> Subject: [drm-intel:drm-intel-next-

Re: [Intel-gfx] [-next PATCH 2/4] treewide: Use DEVICE_ATTR_RW

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2017-12-20 at 10:59 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > Why you didn't send that patch to the sysfs maintainer is a bit odd... > > > > :) > > > > > > So here's an opportunity for you: > > > > > > The sysfs maintainer hasn't added

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 10/13] drm/fb-helper: Support deferred setup (fwd)

An unlock may be missing before line 2568. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:26:56 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 10/13] drm/fb-hel

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/cfl: Basic DDI plumbing for Coffee Lake. (fwd)

Hello, There are two tests on IS_KBL_ULT on line 423. Please check on whether this is intentional. thanks, julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 01:20:56 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.la

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 04/22] target: Make use of the new sg_map function at 16 call sites (fwd)

It looks like >cmdr_lock should be released at line 512 if it has not been released otherwise. The lock was taken at line 438. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 22:21:44 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Jul

[Intel-gfx] [drm-intel:drm-intel-nightly 1066/1091] drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c:933:48-49: ERROR: reference preceded by free on line 926 (fwd)

o: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> Subject: [drm-intel:drm-intel-nightly 1066/1091] drivers/gpu/drm/drm_plane.c:933:48-49: ERROR: reference preceded by free on line 926 tree: git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel drm-intel-

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] ALSA: x86: hdmi: fix returnvar.cocci warnings

Remove unneeded variable used to store return value. Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/misc/returnvar.cocci CC: Jerome Anand <jerome.an...@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang...@intel.com> --- In-Reply-To: <

Re: [Intel-gfx] [GLK MIPI DSI V3 3/7] drm/i915/glk: Add MIPIIO Enable/disable sequence

Line 427 is under the if on line 422 and the subsequent lines are not. It is not clear at all what is intended. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 02:13:07 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Disable stolen on 865G (fwd)

An extra tab would help avoid misunderstandings. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 19:33:05 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Di

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/gen9: Add WaInPlaceDecompressionHang (fwd)

It looks like lines 1133 and 1134 should be indented more. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 01:21:21 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] d

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/10] drm/virtio: Drop dummy gamma table support

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Emil Velikov wrote: > On 30 March 2016 at 10:51, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > No need to confuse userspace like this. > > > > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann > > Cc: Dave Airlie > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix itnull.cocci warnings (fwd)

List_for_each entry binds its first argument to an offset from the list pointer, so this should not be NULL. Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/iterators/itnull.cocci Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu --- Please take the patch only if it's a positive warning. Thanks!

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix itnull.cocci warnings (fwd)

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 04:49:06PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > List_for_each entry binds its first argument to an offset from the list > > pointer, so this should not be NULL. > > > > Generated by: scripts/coccin

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/13] drm/i915: GEM operations need to be done under the big lock

Please check on line 690. julia On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, kbuild test robot wrote: > CC: kbuild-...@01.org > In-Reply-To: > <1452252592-24803-9-git-send-email-tvrtko.ursu...@linux.intel.com> > TO: Tvrtko Ursulin > CC: Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > CC: > > Hi

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp/mst: constify drm_dp_mst_topology_cbs structures

The drm_dp_mst_topology_cbs structures are never modified, so declare them as const. Done with the help of Coccinelle. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp_mst.c|2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_dp_mst.c |2 +- inclu

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Add Backlight Control using DPCD for eDP connectors (v4) (fwd)

It looks like at least the call to drm_dp_dpcd_writeb should be indented. Please check. julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 07:15:44 +0800 From: kbuild test robot <fengguang...@intel.com> To: kbu...@01.org Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/sysfs: Grab lock for edid/modes_show

On Fri, 2 Oct 2015, Daniel Vetter wrote: > We chase pointers/lists without taking the locks protecting them, > which isn't that good. > > Fix it. > > v2: Actually unlock properly, spotted by Julia. The unlock is still on top of the unlock label? julia > > Cc: Julia L

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/sysfs: Grab lock for edid/modes_show

Maybe line 294 should become an unlock and should be moved under 295? julia On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, kbuild test robot wrote: > CC: kbuild-...@01.org > In-Reply-To: <1443513993-5228-2-git-send-email-daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> > TO: Daniel Vetter > CC: DRI Development

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 32/39] drm: i915: drop null test before destroy functions

Remove unneeded NULL test. The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) // @@ expression x; @@ -if (x != NULL) \(kmem_cache_destroy\|mempool_destroy\|dma_pool_destroy\)(x); // Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr> --- drivers/g

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/39] drop null test before destroy functions

Recent commits to kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git have made the following functions able to tolerate NULL arguments: kmem_cache_destroy (commit 3942d29918522) mempool_destroy (commit 4e3ca3e033d1) dma_pool_destroy (commit 44d7175da6ea) These patches remove the associated NULL tests for the files

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/20] fix misspelling of current function in string

These patches replace what appears to be a reference to the name of the current function but is misspelled in some way by either the name of the function itself, or by %s and then __func__ in an argument list. // smpl // sudo apt-get install python-pip // sudo pip install python-Levenshtein //

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/20] drm/i915: fix misspelling of current function in string

Replace a misspelled function name by %s and then __func__. This was done using Coccinelle, including the use of Levenshtein distance, as proposed by Rasmus Villemoes. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr --- The semantic patch is difficult to summarize, but is available

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/20] fix misspelling of current function in string

On Mon, 8 Dec 2014, Julian Calaby wrote: Hi Julia, On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 6:20 AM, Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr wrote: These patches replace what appears to be a reference to the name of the current function but is misspelled in some way by either the name of the function itself

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/userptr: Keep spin_lock/unlock in the same block

. This keeps static analysers happy and the reader sane. Suggested-by: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk Cc: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 17 - 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9

Re: [Intel-gfx] [kbuild] [drm-intel:drm-intel-nightly 20/35] drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c:1067:1-11: second lock on line 1086

It's not actually Dan's coccinelle checker... He is just the (much appreciated) messenger. julia On Mon, 5 Aug 2013, Daniel Vetter wrote: Thanks for the report, I'll squash in the following fixup: commit 36bf63c19eb46631fa4556ae54d91a5320a198b2 Author: Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch