From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Clamp cursor coordinates to
 int16_t range
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 19:24:39 +0300
Message-ID: <20131021162439.GA13047@intel.com>
References: <1382371318-9250-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
	<CAKMK7uGcSu_d1EDTuPMMQeAhCcRVhv7DeQCBQepf-OR5V031mQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 219EBE72AD
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:25:01 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uGcSu_d1EDTuPMMQeAhCcRVhv7DeQCBQepf-OR5V031mQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:15:06PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 6:01 PM,  <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrj=E4l=E4 <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > We store cursor_x/y as int16_t internally, but the user provided
> > coordinates are int32_t. Clamp the coordinates so that they don't
> > overflow the int16_t. Since the cursor is only 64x64 in size, the
> > clamping can't cause any visual changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrj=E4l=E4 <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> =

> =

> For shits&giggles: You've bothered with a subtest for this in your crc
> cursor test? Should be a one-liner and would neatly test whether QA
> catches it ...

Yeah it's there. Actually I added the test before I knew the bug
existed. The test is what found the bug for me.

It's not a specific subtest though, but part of all the bigger
cursor-offscreen subtests. The subtest split I'm using there isn't
very fine grained. Maybe I should change that actually. It would
help in pinpointing the failing cases more accurately.

-- =

Ville Syrj=E4l=E4
Intel OTC