From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: saurabhg.gupta@intel.com, alex.zuo@intel.com,
jonathan.cavitt@intel.com, paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com,
ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com, daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915/display: Prevent u64 underflow in intel_fbc_stolen_end
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 15:05:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87eaa8a11bfb87a656489125a19af8a0bde0ce01@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260107162935.8123-2-jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>
On Wed, 07 Jan 2026, Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com> wrote:
> Static analysis reveals a potential integer underflow in
> intel_fbc_stolen_end. This can apparently occur if
> intel_parent_stolen_area_size returns zero (or, theoretically, any value
> less than 2^23), as 2^23 is subtracted from the return value and stored
> in a u64. While this doesn't appear to cause any issues due to the use
> of the min() function to clamp the return values from the
> intel_fbc_stolen_end function, it would be best practice to avoid
> undeflowing values like this on principle. So, rework the function to
> prevent the underflow from occurring. Note that the underflow at
> present would result in the value of intel_fbc_cfb_base_max being
> returned at the end of intel_fbc_stolen_end, so just return that if the
> value of intel_parent_stolen_area_size is too small.
>
> While we're here, fix the other comments here and modify the execution
> path for readability.
>
> v2: (Jani)
> - Fix the comments in intel_fbc_stolen_end
> - Use check_sub_overflow
> - Remove macro that mirrors SZ_8M, as it is now only referenced once
> - Misc. formatting fixes
>
> Fixes: a9da512b3ed7 ("drm/i915: avoid the last 8mb of stolen on BDW/SKL")
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>
> Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com>
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
> index fef2f35ff1e9..1f3f5237a1c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_fbc.c
> @@ -809,19 +809,32 @@ static u64 intel_fbc_cfb_base_max(struct intel_display *display)
>
> static u64 intel_fbc_stolen_end(struct intel_display *display)
> {
> - u64 end;
> + u64 end = intel_fbc_cfb_base_max(display);
>
> - /* The FBC hardware for BDW/SKL doesn't have access to the stolen
> + /*
> + * The FBC hardware for BDW/SKL doesn't have access to the stolen
> * reserved range size, so it always assumes the maximum (8mb) is used.
> * If we enable FBC using a CFB on that memory range we'll get FIFO
> - * underruns, even if that range is not reserved by the BIOS. */
> + * underruns, even if that range is not reserved by the BIOS.
> + */
> if (display->platform.broadwell ||
> - (DISPLAY_VER(display) == 9 && !display->platform.broxton))
> - end = intel_parent_stolen_area_size(display) - 8 * 1024 * 1024;
> - else
> - end = U64_MAX;
> + (DISPLAY_VER(display) == 9 && !display->platform.broxton)) {
> + u64 stolen_area_size = intel_parent_stolen_area_size(display);
> +
> + /*
> + * If stolen_area_size is less than SZ_8M, use
> + * intel_fbc_cfb_base_max instead. This should not happen,
> + * so warn if it does.
> + */
> + if (drm_WARN_ON(display->drm,
> + check_sub_overflow(stolen_area_size,
> + SZ_8M, &stolen_area_size)))
> + return end;
> +
> + return min(end, stolen_area_size);
> + }
>
> - return min(end, intel_fbc_cfb_base_max(display));
> + return end;
> }
>
> static int intel_fbc_min_limit(const struct intel_plane_state *plane_state)
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-09 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-07 16:29 [PATCH v2] drm/i915/display: Prevent u64 underflow in intel_fbc_stolen_end Jonathan Cavitt
2026-01-07 17:32 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915/display: Prevent u64 underflow in intel_fbc_stolen_end (rev2) Patchwork
2026-01-07 20:49 ` ✗ i915.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2026-01-21 17:07 ` Cavitt, Jonathan
2026-01-21 18:11 ` Matt Roper
2026-01-09 13:05 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87eaa8a11bfb87a656489125a19af8a0bde0ce01@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alex.zuo@intel.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jonathan.cavitt@intel.com \
--cc=paulo.r.zanoni@intel.com \
--cc=saurabhg.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox