Nouveau - Oct 2024 - [PATCH][next] drm/nouveau: Avoid -Wflex-array-member-not-at-end warning

On 9/13/24 12:23 PM, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 9/13/24 10:09 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Friendly ping: who can take this, please? ?
> 
> Usually, that's me. But I thought you might want to send a v2 based on
Kees'
> comments?
Do you plan to follow up on this? I'd prefer if we could get rid of the
open-
coded "17". So, maybe just go with the define until we have something
like
STACK_FLEX_COUNT()?
> 
> - Danilo
> 
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Gustavo
>>
>> On 21/08/24 22:16, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>> Use the `DEFINE_RAW_FLEX()` helper for an on-stack definition of
>>> a flexible structure where the size of the flexible-array member
>>> is known at compile-time, and refactor the rest of the code,
>>> accordingly.
>>>
>>> So, with this, fix the following warning:
>>>
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c:779:47: warning: structure
containing
>>> a flexible array member is not at the end of another structure
[-Wflex-array-
>>> member-not-at-end]
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars at kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>> ? drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c | 20 +++++++++-----------
>>> ? 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/
>>> nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c
>>> index eed579a6c858..ddddc69640be 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c
>>> @@ -774,11 +774,9 @@ nv50_hdmi_enable(struct drm_encoder *encoder,
struct
>>> nouveau_crtc *nv_crtc,
>>> ????? struct drm_hdmi_info *hdmi =
&nv_connector->base.display_info.hdmi;
>>> ????? union hdmi_infoframe infoframe = { 0 };
>>> ????? const u8 rekey = 56; /* binary driver, and tegra, constant */
>>> +??? DEFINE_RAW_FLEX(struct nvif_outp_infoframe_v0, args, data,
17);
>>> +??? const u8 data_len = 17; /* same length as in DEFINE_RAW_FLEX
above. */
>>> ????? u32 max_ac_packet;
>>> -??? struct {
>>> -??????? struct nvif_outp_infoframe_v0 infoframe;
>>> -??????? u8 data[17];
>>> -??? } args = { 0 };
>>> ????? int ret, size;
>>> ????? max_ac_packet? = mode->htotal - mode->hdisplay;
>>> @@ -815,29 +813,29 @@ nv50_hdmi_enable(struct drm_encoder *encoder,
struct
>>> nouveau_crtc *nv_crtc,
>>> ????????? return;
>>> ????? /* AVI InfoFrame. */
>>> -??? args.infoframe.version = 0;
>>> -??? args.infoframe.head = nv_crtc->index;
>>> +??? args->version = 0;
>>> +??? args->head = nv_crtc->index;
>>> ????? if
(!drm_hdmi_avi_infoframe_from_display_mode(&infoframe.avi,
>>> &nv_connector->base, mode)) {
>>> ????????? drm_hdmi_avi_infoframe_quant_range(&infoframe.avi,
&nv_connector-
>>> >base, mode,
>>> ???????????????????????????? HDMI_QUANTIZATION_RANGE_FULL);
>>> -??????? size = hdmi_infoframe_pack(&infoframe, args.data, 
>>> ARRAY_SIZE(args.data));
>>> +??????? size = hdmi_infoframe_pack(&infoframe, args->data,
data_len);
>>> ????? } else {
>>> ????????? size = 0;
>>> ????? }
>>> -??? nvif_outp_infoframe(&nv_encoder->outp,
NVIF_OUTP_INFOFRAME_V0_AVI,
>>> &args.infoframe, size);
>>> +??? nvif_outp_infoframe(&nv_encoder->outp,
NVIF_OUTP_INFOFRAME_V0_AVI, args,
>>> size);
>>> ????? /* Vendor InfoFrame. */
>>> -??? memset(&args.data, 0, sizeof(args.data));
>>> +??? memset(args->data, 0, data_len);
>>> ????? if
(!drm_hdmi_vendor_infoframe_from_display_mode(&infoframe.vendor.hdmi,
>>> ?????????????????????????????? &nv_connector->base, mode))
>>> -??????? size = hdmi_infoframe_pack(&infoframe, args.data, 
>>> ARRAY_SIZE(args.data));
>>> +??????? size = hdmi_infoframe_pack(&infoframe, args->data,
data_len);
>>> ????? else
>>> ????????? size = 0;
>>> -??? nvif_outp_infoframe(&nv_encoder->outp,
NVIF_OUTP_INFOFRAME_V0_VSI,
>>> &args.infoframe, size);
>>> +??? nvif_outp_infoframe(&nv_encoder->outp,
NVIF_OUTP_INFOFRAME_V0_VSI, args,
>>> size);
>>> ????? nv_encoder->hdmi.enabled = true;
>>> ? }
>>

On 03/10/24 12:36, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On 9/13/24 12:23 PM, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 9/13/24 10:09 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Friendly ping: who can take this, please? ?
>>
>> Usually, that's me. But I thought you might want to send a v2 based
on Kees'
>> comments?
> 
> Do you plan to follow up on this? I'd prefer if we could get rid of the
open-
> coded "17". So, maybe just go with the define until we have
something like
> STACK_FLEX_COUNT()?
Do you mean the following define...?

nv50_hdmi_enable(...)
{
...
#define data_len    17
     DEFINE_RAW_FLEX(struct nvif_outp_infoframe_v0, args, data, data_len);
...rest of function...
#undef data_len
}

Thanks
--
Gustavo