It sounds like this patch is the one we want. Can it be merged?
Thanks,
Alex
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On 2018-01-09 03:44 AM, Alex Goins wrote:
> > ProcRRSetScreenSize() does bounds checking to ensure that none of the CRTCs
> > have
> > a viewport that extends beyond the new screen size. In doing so, it
> > accounts for
> > if the CRTC is rotated 90 or 270 degrees, swapping width and height.
> >
> > However, it does so by testing if crtc->rotation is equal to RR_Rotate_90 or
> > RR_Rotate_270. crtc->rotation is a bit mask, and it includes reflection as
> > well
> > as rotation. If a CRTC is reflected as well as rotated, it will incorrectly
> > fail
> > this test, resulting in incorrect dimensions being used to verify the
> > validity
> > of the new screen size. In some cases, this can cause valid uses of
> > ProcRRSetScreenSize() to fail with BadMatch.
> >
> > This patch fixes the issue by testing that the bits RR_Rotate_90 or
> > RR_Rotate_270 are set, rather than testing for equality.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Goins <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > randr/rrscreen.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/randr/rrscreen.c b/randr/rrscreen.c
> > index d6c4995..f484383 100644
> > --- a/randr/rrscreen.c
> > +++ b/randr/rrscreen.c
> > @@ -272,7 +272,7 @@ ProcRRSetScreenSize(ClientPtr client)
> > int source_height = mode->mode.height;
> > Rotation rotation = crtc->rotation;
> >
> > - if (rotation == RR_Rotate_90 || rotation == RR_Rotate_270) {
> > + if (rotation & (RR_Rotate_90 | RR_Rotate_270)) {
> > source_width = mode->mode.height;
> > source_height = mode->mode.width;
> > }
> >
>
> Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <[email protected]>
>
>
> --
> Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com
> Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
> _______________________________________________
> [email protected]: X.Org development
> Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
> Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
