mainline build failure due to f1e4c916f97f ("drm/edid: add EDID block count and size helpers")

[Jani Nikula]

On Mon, 30 May 2022, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2022, Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 28, 2022 at 11:59 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's CONFIG_ARM_AEABI, which is normally set everywhere. Without this
>>> option, you the kernel is built for the old 'OABI' that forces all non-packed
>>> struct members to be at least 16-bit aligned.
>>
>> Looks like forced word (32 bit) alignment to me.
>>
>> I wonder how many other structures that messes up, but I committed the
>> EDID fix for now.
>
> Thanks for the fix, and the thorough commit message!
>
>> This has presumably been broken for a long time, but maybe the
>> affected targets don't typically use EDID and kernel modesetting, and
>> only use some fixed display setup instead.
>>
>> Those structure definitions go back a _loong_ time (from a quick 'git
>> blame' I see November 2008).
>>
>> But despite that, I did not mark my fix 'cc:stable' because I don't
>> know if any of those machines affected by this bad arm ABI issue could
>> possibly care.
>>
>> At least my tree hopefully now builds on them, with the BUILD_BUG_ON()
>> that uncovered this.
>
> Indeed the bug is ancient. I just threw in the BUILD_BUG_ON() on a whim
> as an extra sanity check when doing pointer arithmetics on struct edid
> *.
>
> If there are affected machines, buffer overflows are the real danger due
> to edid->extensions indicating the number of extensions.

That is, for EDID. Makes you wonder about all the other packed structs
with enum members across the kernel.

BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center