On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Matthew Auld <
matthew.william.auld at gmail.com> wrote:
> > +/* Note we copy the properties from userspace outside of the i915 perf
> > + * mutex to avoid an awkward lockdep with mmap_sem.
> > + *
> > + * Note this function only validates properties in isolation it doesn't
> > + * validate that the combination of properties makes sense or that all
> > + * properties necessary for a particular kind of stream have been set.
> > + */
> > +static int read_properties_unlocked(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > + u64 __user *uprops,
> > + u32 n_props,
> > + struct perf_open_properties *props)
> > +{
> > + u64 __user *uprop = uprops;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + memset(props, 0, sizeof(struct perf_open_properties));
> > +
> > + if (!n_props) {
> > + DRM_ERROR("No i915 perf properties given");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (n_props > DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_MAX) {
> Ah but DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_MAX is not a property itself.
>
I'm not sure I follow what your implied concern is?
This is just a sanity check for the number properties given by userspace,
based on the assumption that there's currently no reason for multiple
values with a particular property id.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20161031/f614188d/attachment-0001.html>
