Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/fb-helper: fix input validation gaps in check_var

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 07:42:08PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 06:27:17PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >> Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> >
> >> > The __fill_var is after this. I'm honestly not sure what the exact
> >> 
> >> Ah, your patch adds it after that indeed. Please ignore my comment then.
> >
> > So rb: you?
> >
> 
> Yes, I already provided it in my previous email and has been picked by
> patchwork. I could do again but probably will confuse dim when applying.

Yeah just wanted to confirm I cleared up all your questions. Merged the
entire series to drm-misc-next, thanks for the review.

> The only patch from your series that is missing an {r,a}b is #1 right now:
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/dri-devel/list/?series=736966&archived=both

That's a different one :-)

I'll respin with your comments and then let you&Thomas duke it out about
patch 1.
-Daniel

> 
> [...]
> 
> >> > What I'm wondering now is whether too small x/yres won't lead to problems
> >> > of some sorts ... For multi-screen we set the virtual size to be big
> >> > enough for all crtc, and then just set x/yres to be the smallest output.
> >> > That way fbcon knows to only draw as much as is visible on all screens.
> >> > But if you then pan that too much, the bigger screens might not have a big
> >> > enough buffer anymore and things fail (but shouldn't).
> >> >
> >> > Not sure how to fix that tbh.
> >> 
> >> Would this be a problem in practice?
> >
> > I'm frankly not sure. You'd get a black screen for fbcon/fbdev across all
> > outputs, but only if you have userspace doing this intentionally.
> >
> > In a way it's just another artifact of the drm fbdev emulation not using
> > ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY in the various places where it should, and so doesn't
> > really know whether a configuration change will work out.
> >
> > We already have this in obscure mulit-monitor cases where adding another
> > screen kills fbcon, because the display hw is running out of fifo or
> > clocks or whatever, and because the drm fbdev code doesn't check but just
> > blindly commits the entire thing as an atomic commit, the overall commit
> > fails.
> >
> > This worked "better" with legacy kms because there we commit per-crtc, so
> > if any specific crtc runs into a limit check, only that one fails to light
> > up.
> >
> > Imo given that no one cared enough yet to write up atomic TEST_ONLY
> > support for fbdev emulation I think we can continue to just ignore this
> > problem.
> >
> 
> Agreed. If that ends being a problem for people in practice then I guess
> someone can type atomic TEST_ONLY support for the fbdev emulation layer.
> 
> > What should not happen is that fbcon code blows up drawing out of bounds
> > or something like that, resulting in a kernel crash. So from that pov I
> > think it's "safe" :-)
> 
> Great. Thanks a lot for your explanations.
> 
> > -Daniel
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> 
> Javier Martinez Canillas
> Core Platforms
> Red Hat
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch