[PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
flags a s32.

Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

---
V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
 static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
 {
 	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
-	u32 flags = 0;
+	s32 flags = 0;
 
 	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);
 
-- 
2.17.0

[PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
flags a s32.

Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

---
V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
 static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
 {
 	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
-	u32 flags = 0;
+	s32 flags = 0;
 
 	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);
 
-- 
2.17.0

[PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
flags a s32.

Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

---
V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
 static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
 {
 	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
-	u32 flags = 0;
+	s32 flags = 0;
 
 	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);
 
-- 
2.17.0

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/44578/
State : success

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4303 -> Patchwork_9261 =

== Summary - SUCCESS ==

  No regressions found.

  External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/44578/revisions/1/mbox/

== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in Patchwork_9261 that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-b-frame-sequence:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103481)

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-c:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#106097, fdo#106000)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@gem_cs_tlb@basic-default:
      fi-glk-j4005:       DMESG-WARN (fdo#105719) -> PASS

    igt@kms_cursor_legacy@basic-busy-flip-before-cursor-legacy:
      fi-glk-j4005:       FAIL (fdo#106765) -> PASS

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-b:
      fi-snb-2520m:       INCOMPLETE (fdo#103713) -> PASS

    
  fdo#103481 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103481
  fdo#103713 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103713
  fdo#105719 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105719
  fdo#106000 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106000
  fdo#106097 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
  fdo#106765 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106765


== Participating hosts (41 -> 37) ==

  Missing    (4): fi-ctg-p8600 fi-ilk-m540 fi-bsw-cyan fi-skl-6700hq 


== Build changes ==

    * Linux: CI_DRM_4303 -> Patchwork_9261

  CI_DRM_4303: 1b9c22ad0584716664994e1e03ccafc057e83463 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGT_4515: a0f2d23b7d3d4226a0a7637a9240bfa86f08c1d3 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools
  Patchwork_9261: 7b63dbff231355704cfd2eebe26967ddfc926917 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux


== Linux commits ==

7b63dbff2313 drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_9261/issues.html
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/44578/
State : success

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4303_full -> Patchwork_9261_full =

== Summary - WARNING ==

  Minor unknown changes coming with Patchwork_9261_full need to be verified
  manually.
  
  If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
  introduced in Patchwork_9261_full, please notify your bug team to allow them
  to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.

  

== Possible new issues ==

  Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in Patchwork_9261_full:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Warnings ====

    igt@gem_exec_schedule@deep-bsd2:
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> SKIP +2

    igt@gem_mocs_settings@mocs-rc6-vebox:
      shard-kbl:          SKIP -> PASS

    igt@gem_tiled_blits@normal:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> SKIP

    
== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in Patchwork_9261_full that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@kms_atomic_transition@1x-modeset-transitions-nonblocking:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#105703)

    igt@kms_cursor_legacy@cursor-vs-flip-toggle:
      shard-hsw:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103355)

    igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-x-tiled:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#104724, fdo#103822) +1

    igt@kms_setmode@basic:
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#99912)

    igt@perf@blocking:
      shard-hsw:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#102252)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@drv_selftest@live_gtt:
      shard-kbl:          INCOMPLETE (fdo#103665) -> PASS
      shard-glk:          INCOMPLETE (k.org#198133, fdo#103359) -> PASS

    
  fdo#102252 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102252
  fdo#103355 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103355
  fdo#103359 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103359
  fdo#103665 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103665
  fdo#103822 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103822
  fdo#104724 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104724
  fdo#105703 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105703
  fdo#99912 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99912
  k.org#198133 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198133


== Participating hosts (5 -> 5) ==

  No changes in participating hosts


== Build changes ==

    * Linux: CI_DRM_4303 -> Patchwork_9261

  CI_DRM_4303: 1b9c22ad0584716664994e1e03ccafc057e83463 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGT_4515: a0f2d23b7d3d4226a0a7637a9240bfa86f08c1d3 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools
  Patchwork_9261: 7b63dbff231355704cfd2eebe26967ddfc926917 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  piglit_4509: fdc5a4ca11124ab8413c7988896eec4c97336694 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/piglit

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/Patchwork_9261/shards.html
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
> is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
> flags a s32.
> 
> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> ---
> V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
> Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
>  static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
>  {
>  	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
> -	u32 flags = 0;
> +	s32 flags = 0;
>  
>  	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);

Only insane people use "s32" when it's not part of the hardware spec and
you changed the wrong variable...

regards,
dan carpenter

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
> is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
> flags a s32.
> 
> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> ---
> V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
> Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
>  static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
>  {
>  	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
> -	u32 flags = 0;
> +	s32 flags = 0;
>  
>  	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);

Only insane people use "s32" when it's not part of the hardware spec and
you changed the wrong variable...

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
> is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
> flags a s32.
> 
> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> ---
> V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
> Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
>  static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
>  {
>  	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
> -	u32 flags = 0;
> +	s32 flags = 0;
>  
>  	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);

Only insane people use "s32" when it's not part of the hardware spec and
you changed the wrong variable...

regards,
dan carpenter

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Jani Nikula]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>> 
>> The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
>> is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
>> flags a s32.
>> 
>> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>> 
>> ---
>> V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
>> Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
>>  static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
>>  {
>>  	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
>> -	u32 flags = 0;
>> +	s32 flags = 0;
>>  
>>  	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);
>
> Only insane people use "s32" when it's not part of the hardware spec and
> you changed the wrong variable...

Yeah, int level.

Also,

Fixes: cb5d64e9f13e ("drm/i915/guc: Allow user to control default GuC logging")

BR,
Jani.


>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

Re: [PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Jani Nikula]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>> 
>> The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
>> is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
>> flags a s32.
>> 
>> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>> 
>> ---
>> V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
>> Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
>>  static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
>>  {
>>  	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
>> -	u32 flags = 0;
>> +	s32 flags = 0;
>>  
>>  	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);
>
> Only insane people use "s32" when it's not part of the hardware spec and
> you changed the wrong variable...

Yeah, int level.

Also,

Fixes: cb5d64e9f13e ("drm/i915/guc: Allow user to control default GuC logging")

BR,
Jani.


>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

Re: [PATCH][V2] drm/i915/guc: fix GEM_BUG_ON check

[Jani Nikula]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>> 
>> The check for level being less than zero always false because flags
>> is currently unsigned and can never be negative. Fix this by making
>> flags a s32.
>> 
>> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1468363 ("Macro compares unsigned to 0")
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>> 
>> ---
>> V2: Make flags s32 rather than remove the GEM_BUG_ON check, thanks to
>> Ville Syrjälä for spotting the mistake in my first attempt.
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> index 116f4ccf1bbd..fb31f5004bcf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc.c
>> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void intel_guc_fini(struct intel_guc *guc)
>>  static u32 get_log_control_flags(void)
>>  {
>>  	u32 level = i915_modparams.guc_log_level;
>> -	u32 flags = 0;
>> +	s32 flags = 0;
>>  
>>  	GEM_BUG_ON(level < 0);
>
> Only insane people use "s32" when it's not part of the hardware spec and
> you changed the wrong variable...

Yeah, int level.

Also,

Fixes: cb5d64e9f13e ("drm/i915/guc: Allow user to control default GuC logging")

BR,
Jani.


>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel