From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: drm/atomic: Allocate atomic_state at the beginning of atomic_ioctl
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:55:27 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch4-20260331-atomic-v11-4-6a1df7ec5af8@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260331-atomic-v11-4-6a1df7ec5af8@intel.com>
Patch Review
This moves `drm_atomic_state_alloc()` and `drm_modeset_acquire_init()` before the early validation checks, converting early `return -EINVAL` to `goto out`. This means every trivially-invalid call now allocates and frees an atomic state, acquires/releases modeset locks, etc. That's unnecessary overhead for simple validation failures.
The original code was structured to fail fast cheaply. The justification is to have `state->error_code` available, but for these trivial "invalid flag" / "reserved field set" cases, the error is already clear from the errno. Consider only allocating early when the error reporting pointer (`arg->reserved`) is actually provided.
**The `arg->reserved` check is removed** from the validation:
```c
- if (arg->reserved) {
- drm_dbg_atomic(dev, "commit failed: reserved field set\n");
- return -EINVAL;
- }
```
This is the mechanism that ensures forward/backward compatibility. Removing it without a versioning scheme means old kernels that don't understand the new meaning of `reserved` will reject the call, which is fine, but old userspace that sets `reserved` to garbage will now have `copy_to_user` write to a random address. The capability check in patch 7 partially addresses this (new userspace should check the cap first), but the kernel should still validate the pointer somehow.
---
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-31 21:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-31 9:03 [PATCH v11 0/7] User readable error codes on atomic_ioctl failure Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 1/7] drm: Define user readable error codes for atomic ioctl Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 2/7] drm/atomic: Add error_code element in atomic_state Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 3/7] drm/atomic: Call complete_signaling only if prepare_signaling is done Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 4/7] drm/atomic: Allocate atomic_state at the beginning of atomic_ioctl Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 5/7] drm/atomic: Return user readable error in atomic_ioctl Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 6/7] drm/i915/display: Error codes for async flip failures Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:03 ` [PATCH v11 7/7] drm: Introduce DRM_CAP_ATOMIC_ERROR_REPORTING Arun R Murthy
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 21:55 ` Claude review: User readable error codes on atomic_ioctl failure Claude Code Review Bot
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-02-23 9:15 [PATCH v10 0/7] " Arun R Murthy
2026-02-23 9:16 ` [PATCH v10 4/7] drm/atomic: Allocate atomic_state at the beginning of atomic_ioctl Arun R Murthy
2026-02-24 0:27 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-10 9:03 [PATCH v9 0/7] User readable error codes on atomic_ioctl failure Arun R Murthy
2026-02-10 9:03 ` [PATCH v9 3/7] drm/atomic: Allocate atomic_state at the beginning of atomic_ioctl Arun R Murthy
2026-02-11 6:31 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=review-patch4-20260331-atomic-v11-4-6a1df7ec5af8@intel.com \
--to=claude-review@example.com \
--cc=dri-devel-reviews@example.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox