[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] efifb: ignore frame buffer with physical address 0
- To: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 14:56:33 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=15/mCCZo8iSZ2OCYInkPQMMZKDWnQCxH+KVsa63G4MY=; b=cOeNQQIGSifTn06GBECtBpTPGjkaYUgsGM6LjrLcKOi8zRg3FRQxSjqKDyH7Wr8xrTIvcX5cfmAUUA4WYyGi64JdH6OmsPYnKRVw1aGa+RDG+KTjq6KHLwz/6T+yErLjaBODA3picCtzgbWQvVc/hTEj3m5JPww9bbsa+oexUF6d/D4cka6YALJVTwqVfPZSALVcyB5C4Qn4Fpv0jcGOvbugi7PYl72wQPJYRd79RLlbEShjfOp4pny+IHQj4YAu4p24+Eg9H6QYUoEGoczc5ouqzR2wEqewNUnonCrNXWRsKOl0d5CQJ2DHqij+9V2A1wGQu/kB7npNld9UhJS2sQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=WdGYqp/6JtNSAqrNYxcYiab+gq4sDzdCA2wTqybHoZY0v9E9KtyCUTNUx5Q3f+6qLj4fl3yaiXbAD+w7BMlEEGeZbuZtP+7RDcdEGmI3GIIID1xQdc3BdJ+gsX2+CH7FiWHizKHqWEJgjFkc62P1yvKRH6R8KirsFI6b4ZDfGycUjW9aVzgD18hQMhf80Xvgd2EPQD8uJ9M4eYGmFDDvYpma3EYzE12DM7HJFBHLtAcK/RoLhqUU1dt157ruTJdcghf4NWXVdI3XSyzIOEXTEJkNkqHJ1e8vtLYOaZTdf7P+JtgIqFohjPhCdDpBNeoS8sTikWhbENnETX5mgjBN2A==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 13:56:39 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 18.11.2022 14:44, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 02:04:40PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 18.11.2022 13:39, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h
>>> @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ static void __init
>>> efi_arch_video_init(EFI_GRAPHICS_OUTPUT_PROTOCOL *gop,
>>> bpp = 0;
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> - if ( bpp > 0 )
>>> + if ( bpp > 0 && gop->Mode->FrameBufferBase )
>>> {
>>> vga_console_info.video_type = XEN_VGATYPE_EFI_LFB;
>>> vga_console_info.u.vesa_lfb.gbl_caps = 2; /* possibly non-VGA */
>>
>> A few lines up from here, just out of patch context, there is a
>> PrintErr() which imo is bogus/misleading when also encountering a
>> zero fb base. I'd like to suggest that you put the new check early
>> in the function (perhaps extended by a zero check of other
>> applicable fields, as per above), returning right away alongside
>> another new PrintErr().
>
> Would you be fine with the new message being "Invalid Frame Buffer
> configuration found"?
Yeah, that'll probably do.
Jan
|
