On pe, 2016-12-16 at 07:47 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> A simple assert to ensure that we don't overflow start + size when
> initialising the drm_mm, or its scanner.
>
> In future, we may want to switch to tracking the value of ranges (rather
> than size) so that we can cover the full u64, for example like resource
> tracking.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
<SNIP>
> @@ -729,6 +729,8 @@ void drm_mm_init_scan(struct drm_mm *mm,
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â u64 alignment,
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â unsigned long color)
> Â {
> + DRM_MM_BUG_ON(size == 0);
Nitpicking, DIM will complain that this should be !size.
> +
> > Â mm->scan_color = color;
> > Â mm->scan_alignment = alignment;
> > Â mm->scan_size = size;
> @@ -764,6 +766,9 @@ void drm_mm_init_scan_with_range(struct drm_mm *mm,
> Â Â u64 start,
> Â Â u64 end)
> Â {
Ditto, could have simply DRM_MM_BUG_ON(!size);
Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
Regards, Joonas
> + DRM_MM_BUG_ON(start >= end);
> + DRM_MM_BUG_ON(size == 0 || size > end - start);
> +
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
