Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:23:58 +0100
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To:     Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc:     Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiramelo@gmail.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/bochs: Fix NULL dereference on atomic_disable helper
Message-ID: <20190311132358.GF2665@phenom.ffwll.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
        Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigosiqueiramelo@gmail.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20190310212150.xhhb4abzm7j3ain2@smtp.gmail.com>
 <20190311062200.4mtel3j5fjxtxrcf@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
 <20190311101159.t6mbzm5sdwuh5muc@smtp.gmail.com>
 <20190311130716.6hjqci43clic5lxx@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190311130716.6hjqci43clic5lxx@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 02:07:16PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
> 
> > > >  static void bochs_crtc_atomic_flush(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
> > > >  				    struct drm_crtc_state *old_crtc_state)
> > > >  {
> > > > @@ -66,6 +71,7 @@ static const struct drm_crtc_funcs bochs_crtc_funcs = {
> > > >  static const struct drm_crtc_helper_funcs bochs_helper_funcs = {
> > > >  	.mode_set_nofb = bochs_crtc_mode_set_nofb,
> > > >  	.atomic_enable = bochs_crtc_atomic_enable,
> > > > +	.atomic_disable = bochs_crtc_atomic_disable,
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't we make the callback optional instead of adding empty dummy
> > > functions to drivers?
> > 
> > Hi Gerd,
> > 
> > I agree, and I can work in this issue.
> > Just one question, should we make atomic_enable optional as well?
> 
> IIRC the drm code checks for the atomic_enable callback presence to
> figure whenever it should take the atomic or legacy code paths.

It should check for drm_driver->mode_config.funcs.atomic_commit for that,
see drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset(). Anything else should be a bug.

Or do you mean the fallback to the old crtc helper prepare/commit
callbacks? We'd need to make all of them optional ofc, with atomic_
variants being preferred ofc.
-Daniel


> 
> So, I think that will not work.
> 
> cheers,
>   Gerd
> 

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