Sergei Antonov
2014-Apr-15 21:18 UTC
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau/bios: fix a bit shift error introduced by 457e77b
Commit 457e77b26428ab4a24998eecfb99f27fa4195397 added two checks applied to a value received from nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04). But after this new piece of code is executed, the addr local variable does not hold the same value it used to hold before the commit. Here is what is was assigned in the original code: (u64)(nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04) & 0xffffff00) << 8 in the committed code it ends up with this value: (u64)(nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04) >> 8) << 8 These expressions are obviously not equivalent. My Nvidia video card does not show anything on the display when I boot a kernel containing this commit. The patch fixes the code so that the new checks are still done, but the side effect of an incorrect addr value is gone. Cc: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Sergei Antonov <saproj at gmail.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c index e9df94f..291adb6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ nouveau_bios_shadow_pramin(struct nouveau_bios *bios) return; } - addr = (u64)(addr >> 8) << 8; + addr = (u64)(addr & 0xffffff00) << 8; if (!addr) { addr = (u64)nv_rd32(bios, 0x001700) << 16; addr += 0xf0000; -- 1.9.0
Sergei Antonov
2014-Apr-15 21:49 UTC
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau/bios: fix a bit shift error introduced by 457e77b
On 15 April 2014 23:18, Sergei Antonov <saproj at gmail.com> wrote:> Commit 457e77b26428ab4a24998eecfb99f27fa4195397 added two checks applied to a > value received from nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04). But after this new piece of code > is executed, the addr local variable does not hold the same value it used to > hold before the commit. Here is what is was assigned in the original code: > (u64)(nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04) & 0xffffff00) << 8 > in the committed code it ends up with this value: > (u64)(nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04) >> 8) << 8 > These expressions are obviously not equivalent. > > My Nvidia video card does not show anything on the display when I boot a > kernel containing this commit. > > The patch fixes the code so that the new checks are still done, but the > side effect of an incorrect addr value is gone. > > Cc: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs at redhat.com> > Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> > Signed-off-by: Sergei Antonov <saproj at gmail.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c > index e9df94f..291adb6 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/bios/base.c > @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ nouveau_bios_shadow_pramin(struct nouveau_bios *bios) > return; > } > > - addr = (u64)(addr >> 8) << 8; > + addr = (u64)(addr & 0xffffff00) << 8;I just noticed that "(u64)" is redundant here. Can it be removed in the patch without resubmitting, Andrew?> if (!addr) { > addr = (u64)nv_rd32(bios, 0x001700) << 16; > addr += 0xf0000; > -- > 1.9.0 >
Emil Velikov
2014-Apr-19 20:14 UTC
[Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau/bios: fix a bit shift error introduced by 457e77b
On 15/04/14 22:49, Sergei Antonov wrote:> On 15 April 2014 23:18, Sergei Antonov <saproj at gmail.com> wrote: >> Commit 457e77b26428ab4a24998eecfb99f27fa4195397 added two checks applied to a >> value received from nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04). But after this new piece of code >> is executed, the addr local variable does not hold the same value it used to >> hold before the commit. Here is what is was assigned in the original code: >> (u64)(nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04) & 0xffffff00) << 8 >> in the committed code it ends up with this value: >> (u64)(nv_rd32(bios, 0x619f04) >> 8) << 8 >> These expressions are obviously not equivalent. >> >> My Nvidia video card does not show anything on the display when I boot a >> kernel containing this commit. >> >> The patch fixes the code so that the new checks are still done, but the >> side effect of an incorrect addr value is gone. >>Hi Sergei A similar patch [1] has been sent a few days prior to yours, and I'm assuming it will be queued/merged shortly. Just letting you know. Cheers -Emil [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2014-April/057318.html
Reasonably Related Threads
- [PATCH] drm/nouveau/bios: fix a bit shift error introduced by 457e77b
- [PATCH] drm/nouveau/bios: fix a bit shift error introduced by 457e77b
- [Bug 88868] New: PowerPC e5500, kernel crash, GT520, GT610
- [PATCH] drm/nouveau/dp: restore DP suspend/resume functionality
- [PATCH] drm/nouveau/dp: restore DP suspend/resume functionality