drm/i915: Use unsigned for overflow checks in execbuf
There's actually no real risk since we already check for stricter constraints earlier (using UINT_MAX / sizeof (struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2) as the limit). But in eb_create we use signed integers, which steals a factor of 2. Luckily struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 for this to not matter. Still, be consistent and use unsigned integers. Similar use unsinged integers when checking for overflows in the relocation entry processing. I've also added a new subtests to igt/gem_reloc_overflow to also test for overflowing args->buffer_count values. v2: Give the variables again tighter scope to make it clear that the computation is purely local and doesn't leak out to the 2nd block. Requested by Chris Wilson. Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment