Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix potential overflow of shmem scatterlist length

[Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 06:29:12PM +0100, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 February 2026 16:38:18 CET Andi Shyti wrote:
> > > > For clarity this can be written as
> > > > 
> > > > 		nr_pages = min_t(unsigned long,
> > > > 				folio_nr_pages(folio), page_count - i);
> > > > 		nr_pages = min_t(unsigned long, nr_pages, max_pages);
> > > 
> > > Do you think the min_array() is less clear?  Let's see what others say.
> > 
> > min_array() is clear, it's the ((unsigned long[]) { ... }) that
> > iis nice and fancy but of difficult first read. But, as I said,
> > it can stay, I don't have a strong opinion, maybe I'd have done
> > the same.
> 
> Would you be more happy with a locally declared unsigned long table, 
> initalized with those 3 values, nr_pages - i and max_segment << PAGE_SHIFT 
> statically, folio_nr_pages(folio) once folio is ready, then passed to 
> min_array()?

mine was only an idea, I'm fine with what it is now if no one has
anything against it. Perhaps, just a little comment could help
understand why we are evaluating out of three elements (but we
are talking trivial details here :) ).

Thanks,
Andi