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;
Date:   Mon, 24 Jul 2023 19:35:27 +0200
From:   Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To:     Su Hui <suhui@nfschina.com>
Cc:     jani.nikula@linux.intel.com, joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com,
        rodrigo.vivi@intel.com, tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com,
        airlied@gmail.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, nathan@kernel.org,
        ndesaulniers@google.com, trix@redhat.com, andrzej.hajda@intel.com,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, mripard@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915/tv: avoid possible division by
 zero
Message-ID: <ZL62X3/CnsJcWWU4@ashyti-mobl2.lan>
References: <20230718013216.495830-1-suhui@nfschina.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230718013216.495830-1-suhui@nfschina.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 09:32:17AM +0800, Su Hui wrote:
> Clang warning: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_tv.c:
> line 991, column 22 Division by zero.
> Assuming tv_mode->oversample=1 and (!tv_mode->progressive)=1,
> then division by zero will happen.
> 
> Fixes: 1bba5543e4fe ("drm/i915: Fix TV encoder clock computation")
> Signed-off-by: Su Hui <suhui@nfschina.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_tv.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_tv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_tv.c
> index 36b479b46b60..f59553f7c132 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_tv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_tv.c
> @@ -988,7 +988,7 @@ intel_tv_mode_to_mode(struct drm_display_mode *mode,
>  		      const struct tv_mode *tv_mode,
>  		      int clock)
>  {
> -	mode->clock = clock / (tv_mode->oversample >> !tv_mode->progressive);
> +	mode->clock = clock / tv_mode->oversample << !tv_mode->progressive;

but this does not provide the same value. Try with:

	8 / (2 >> 1)

and

	8 / 2 << 1

They are definitely different.

The real check could be:

	if (!(tv_mode->oversample >> 1))
		return ...

But first I would check if that's actually possible.

Andi