Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
To:     Pierre Asselin <pa@panix.com>
Cc:     Pierre Asselin <pa@panix.com>,
        Jocelyn Falempe <jfalempe@redhat.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware/sysfb: Fix wrong stride when bits-per-pixel is
 calculated
In-Reply-To: <9e6fff69b09b36cbdd96499cd0015154.squirrel@mail.panix.com>
References: <20230412150225.3757223-1-javierm@redhat.com>
 <2e07f818ccdff7023a060e732d7c4ef6.squirrel@mail.panix.com>
 <87jzyhror0.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
 <beeff0335ab4cc244d214a7baadba371.squirrel@mail.panix.com>
 <CAFOAJEdKBUg91pDmNYYw5xigUxjifBgOLz2YgD+xQ+WyEy=V2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1afd3044c2aca9322ecf304941c7df66.squirrel@mail.panix.com>
 <87fs94stgw.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
 <87cz48srs4.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
 <40edb0fdb0eaff434f4872dd677923a6.squirrel@mail.panix.com>
 <87a5zcsqg8.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
 <9e6fff69b09b36cbdd96499cd0015154.squirrel@mail.panix.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2023 08:54:58 +0200
Message-ID: <87r0souv99.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

"Pierre Asselin" <pa@panix.com> writes:

[...]

> [    3.343433] sysfb: si->rsvd_size 0 si->rsvd_pos 0

Thanks for confirming this. I was expected that as mentioned since it was
the only reasonable explanation for your problem.

[...]

> What if _depth is low but the rsvd_ are right ?
> Then _width and _linelength would be inconsistent with _depth but
> consistent with the recomputed bits_per_pixel ?  How many ways can the
> firmware lie ?
>

I don't know. But in your case the firmware is not reporting the mode
correctly since it is setting a framebuffer of 1024x768 and xRGB but
is not reporting si->rsvd_size=8 and si->rsvd_pos=24 as it should.

One option is to have a DMI match table similar to what we already have
for EFI machines in drivers/firmware/efi/sysfb_efi.c but also for BIOS.

The question then is if we can trust other systems to report a proper
rsvd_size and rsvd_pos...

> We need more testers, don't we ?
>

It's tricky, yes.

-- 
Best regards,

Javier Martinez Canillas
Core Platforms
Red Hat