From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kumar, Shobhit" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Add parsing support for new MIPI blocks in VBT Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:25:22 +0530 Message-ID: <534BB08A.6080002@intel.com> References: <1392895001-26055-3-git-send-email-shobhit.kumar@intel.com> <1397453434-9427-1-git-send-email-shobhit.kumar@intel.com> <20140414070251.GB8068@phenom.ffwll.local> <534B9443.7020609@intel.com> <20140414075927.GA1023@phenom.ffwll.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08196E750 for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 02:55:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140414075927.GA1023@phenom.ffwll.local> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Daniel Vetter Cc: Jani Nikula , Daniel Vetter , intel-gfx List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On 4/14/2014 2:35 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 01:24:43PM +0530, Kumar, Shobhit wrote: >> On 4/14/2014 12:32 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 11:00:34AM +0530, Shobhit Kumar wrote: >>>> The parser extracts the config block(#52) and sequence(#53) data >>>> and store in private data structures. >>>> >>>> v2: Address review comments by Jani >>>> - adjust code for the structure changes for bdb_mipi_config >>>> - add boundry and buffer overflow checks as suggested >>>> - use kmemdup instead of kmalloc and memcpy >>>> >>>> v3: More strict check while parsing VBT >>>> - Ensure that at anytime we do not go beyond sequence block >>>> while parsing >>>> - On unknown element fail the whole parsing >>>> >>>> v4: Style changes and spell check mostly as suggested by Jani >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Shobhit Kumar >>>> Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula >>> >>> I didn't spot Jani's r-b tag in earlier mails, was that done off-list? >> >> Yeah, was reviewed along with the other DSI patchset you merged, sorry about >> that. But then some patches needed internal review while they were being >> approved for up-streaming to save time. And this one was related to the >> other panel driver patches which I published today so got stuck with them. >> Sorry about that. > > Ok, pulled it in. checkpatch complained a few times about assignments in > if conditions, and I tend to agree. Can you please follow up with a > cleanup patch? Also it looks like assignment operators could be used. > -Daniel Ok. Thanks. I should have run checkpatch. Will fix and push a cleanup patch. Regards Shobhit