RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/8] drm/edid: Don't accept any old garbage as a display descriptor

2020-02-03 Thread Shankar, Uma
t; > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/8] drm/edid: Don't accept any old garbage > as a > display descriptor > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:02 PM Ville Syrjala > wrote: > > > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > > > Currently we assume any 18 byte descriptor

Re: [PATCH 2/8] drm/edid: Don't accept any old garbage as a display descriptor

2020-01-27 Thread Alex Deucher
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:02 PM Ville Syrjala wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä > > Currently we assume any 18 byte descriptor to be a display descritor > if only the tag byte matches the expected value. But for detailed > timing descriptors that same byte is just the lower 8 bits of > hblank, and a

[PATCH 2/8] drm/edid: Don't accept any old garbage as a display descriptor

2020-01-24 Thread Ville Syrjala
From: Ville Syrjälä Currently we assume any 18 byte descriptor to be a display descritor if only the tag byte matches the expected value. But for detailed timing descriptors that same byte is just the lower 8 bits of hblank, and as such can match any display descriptor tag. To properly validate t