Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use unsigned for overflow checks in execbuf

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 02:53:36PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > There's actually no real risk since we already check for stricter > constraints earlier (using UINT_MAX / sizeof (struct > drm_i915_gem_exec_object2) as the limit). But in eb_create we use > signed integers, which steals a factor of 2

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use unsigned for overflow checks in execbuf

There's actually no real risk since we already check for stricter constraints earlier (using UINT_MAX / sizeof (struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2) as the limit). But in eb_create we use signed integers, which steals a factor of 2. Luckily struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 for this to not matter. Sti

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use unsigned for overflow checks in execbuf

There's actually no real risk since we already check for stricter constraints earlier (using UINT_MAX / sizeof (struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2) as the limit). But in eb_create we use signed integers, which steals a factor of 2. Luckily struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 for this to not matter. Sti