Re: [PATCH v2] firmware/sysfb: Fix VESA format selection

From: Thomas Zimmermann
Date: Thu Apr 20 2023 - 04:22:29 EST


Hi

Am 19.04.23 um 22:27 schrieb Pierre Asselin:
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 19.04.23 um 06:48 schrieb Pierre Asselin:

v2 fixes the warnings from a max3() macro with arguments of different
types; split the bits_per_pixel assignment to avoid uglyfing the code
with too many typecasts.

What exactly was that warning?

A friendly note from a robot; make W=1 sysfb_simplefb.o .
https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20230418183325.2327-1-pa@xxxxxxxxx/T/#m38e859354329ab9f756da91e99b546e3b140fa91


I liked the all-in-one assignment of the original patch. So I'd rather
go back to v1 and copy si->lfb_depth to the correct type, like this:

u32 depth = si->lfb_depth;
bits_per_pixel = max3(max3(colors),
rsvd,
depth);

Would that work? If I understand correctly max3() checks that all args
have the same type. {red,green,blue,rsvd}.{size,pos} are all u8 while
lfb_depth is u16. The best I can do is

Maybe make the depth variable a u8 then with a clamp_t()-based cast there:

u8 depth = clamp_t(u8, si->lfb_depth, 1, 32);

There's currently no way that lfb_depth would be outside the [1, 32] range.


bits_per_pixel = max3((u16)max3(si->red_size + si->red_pos,
si->green_size + si->green_pos,
si->blue_size + si->blue_pos),
(u16)(si->rsvd_size + si->rsvd_pos),
si->lfb_depth);

That compiles quietly with W=1 but those two casts are ugly.
If I do that, would K&R-on-parentheses read better ?

bits_per_pixel = max3(
(u16)max3(
si->red_size + si->red_pos,
si->green_size + si->green_pos,
si->blue_size + si->blue_pos
),
(u16)(si->rsvd_size + si->rsvd_pos),
si->lfb_depth
);

I think it's clearer, but not kernel style and still ugly.

Or, if you want to get fancy, you could add max3_t() to <linux/minmax.h>

#define max3_t(type, x, y, z) max_t(type, max_t(type, x, y), z)

and do

bits_per_pixel = max3_t(u32,
max3(colors),
rsvd,
si->lfb_depth)

You could also add a max4_t(type, x, y, z, w) to <linux/minmax.h> and
compare all values with max4_t().

That would be a two-patch series. I'd rather keep it to the strict
minimum that fixes the regression. (You trust me to even *look* at a
kernel header and not break it ? Dangerous assumption!)

I'm new at this. Two months ago I didn't know what to type a the
command line after "git".

Welcome to the kernel community. :)


Incidentally, should I send v3 as a new email or reply to the chain?

As a new mail, please. It's easier for readers and tools.

Best regards
Thomas


--PA


--
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany
GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman
HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature