diff mbox series

[v4l-utils,6/8] v4l2-compliance: Support the changed routing API

Message ID 20240402000033.4007-7-laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series Support for the generic line-based metadata support | expand

Commit Message

Laurent Pinchart April 2, 2024, midnight UTC 
Set len_routes of struct v4l2_subdev_routing. ENOSPC error code is no
longer used, i.e. having room for fewer routes than exist in the
configuration is not considered an error anymore.

Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
---
 utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp   | 12 +++++++-----
 utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp | 19 +++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

Comments

Tomi Valkeinen April 2, 2024, 10:54 a.m. UTC | #1 
On 02/04/2024 03:00, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Set len_routes of struct v4l2_subdev_routing. ENOSPC error code is no
> longer used, i.e. having room for fewer routes than exist in the
> configuration is not considered an error anymore.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
> ---
>   utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp   | 12 +++++++-----
>   utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp | 19 +++++++++++--------
>   2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> index 2cf979096bd0..72fe0bd778ab 100644
> --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> @@ -1272,15 +1272,17 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
>   
>   			for (unsigned which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY;
>   				which <= V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE; which++) {
> +				struct v4l2_subdev_routing &routing = sd_routing[which];
>   
> -				sd_routing[which].which = which;
> -				sd_routing[which].routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
> -				sd_routing[which].num_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
> +				routing.which = which;
> +				routing.routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
> +				routing.len_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
> +				routing.num_routes = 0;

Not part of this series, but something I noticed while testing. Our routing code is broken for 32-bit userspace: we convert the routes pointer to u64, which ends up sign extending the address.

Interestingly gcc gives "cast from pointer to integer of different size [-Wpointer-to-int-cast]", but g++ doesn't, and "command-line option ‘-Wpointer-to-int-cast’ is valid for C/ObjC but not for C++". So we don't get any warnings for the bugs.

With a quick look I found these places to fix. Will you add a patch to your series, or should I send this as a separate one?

diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
index 72fe0bd7..a969b69c 100644
--- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
+++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
@@ -1275,7 +1275,7 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
                                 struct v4l2_subdev_routing &routing = sd_routing[which];
  
                                 routing.which = which;
-                               routing.routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
+                               routing.routes = (__u64)(uintptr_t)sd_routes[which];
                                 routing.len_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
                                 routing.num_routes = 0;
  
@@ -1307,7 +1307,7 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
                                         routes = sd_routes[which];
                                 } else {
                                         dummy_routing.num_routes = 1;
-                                       dummy_routing.routes = (__u64)&dummy_routes;
+                                       dummy_routing.routes = (__u64)(uintptr_t)&dummy_routes;
                                         dummy_routes[0].source_pad = pad;
                                         dummy_routes[0].source_stream = 0;
                                         dummy_routes[0].sink_pad = pad;
diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
index e26d09ed..21d7776a 100644
--- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
+++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
@@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which)
         int ret;
  
         routing.which = which;
-       routing.routes = (__u64)&routes;
+       routing.routes = (__u64)(uintptr_t)&routes;
         routing.len_routes = 0;
         routing.num_routes = 0;
         memset(routing.reserved, 0xff, sizeof(routing.reserved));


  Tomi
Sakari Ailus April 5, 2024, 6:37 a.m. UTC | #2 
Moi,

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 01:54:00PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 02/04/2024 03:00, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Set len_routes of struct v4l2_subdev_routing. ENOSPC error code is no
> > longer used, i.e. having room for fewer routes than exist in the
> > configuration is not considered an error anymore.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
> > ---
> >   utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp   | 12 +++++++-----
> >   utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp | 19 +++++++++++--------
> >   2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> > index 2cf979096bd0..72fe0bd778ab 100644
> > --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> > +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> > @@ -1272,15 +1272,17 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
> >   			for (unsigned which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY;
> >   				which <= V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE; which++) {
> > +				struct v4l2_subdev_routing &routing = sd_routing[which];
> > -				sd_routing[which].which = which;
> > -				sd_routing[which].routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
> > -				sd_routing[which].num_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
> > +				routing.which = which;
> > +				routing.routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
> > +				routing.len_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
> > +				routing.num_routes = 0;
> 
> Not part of this series, but something I noticed while testing. Our
> routing code is broken for 32-bit userspace: we convert the routes
> pointer to u64, which ends up sign extending the address.
> 
> Interestingly gcc gives "cast from pointer to integer of different size
> [-Wpointer-to-int-cast]", but g++ doesn't, and "command-line option
> ‘-Wpointer-to-int-cast’ is valid for C/ObjC but not for C++". So we don't
> get any warnings for the bugs.

Nice find!

> 
> With a quick look I found these places to fix. Will you add a patch to
> your series, or should I send this as a separate one?
> 
> diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> index 72fe0bd7..a969b69c 100644
> --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
> @@ -1275,7 +1275,7 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
>                                 struct v4l2_subdev_routing &routing = sd_routing[which];
>                                 routing.which = which;
> -                               routing.routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
> +                               routing.routes = (__u64)(uintptr_t)sd_routes[which];

I don't think you need the second cast anymore as it's already an integer.
Same for the rest.

>                                 routing.len_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
>                                 routing.num_routes = 0;
> @@ -1307,7 +1307,7 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
>                                         routes = sd_routes[which];
>                                 } else {
>                                         dummy_routing.num_routes = 1;
> -                                       dummy_routing.routes = (__u64)&dummy_routes;
> +                                       dummy_routing.routes = (__u64)(uintptr_t)&dummy_routes;
>                                         dummy_routes[0].source_pad = pad;
>                                         dummy_routes[0].source_stream = 0;
>                                         dummy_routes[0].sink_pad = pad;
> diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
> index e26d09ed..21d7776a 100644
> --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
> +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
> @@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which)
>         int ret;
>         routing.which = which;
> -       routing.routes = (__u64)&routes;
> +       routing.routes = (__u64)(uintptr_t)&routes;
>         routing.len_routes = 0;
>         routing.num_routes = 0;
>         memset(routing.reserved, 0xff, sizeof(routing.reserved));
> 
> 
>  Tomi
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
index 2cf979096bd0..72fe0bd778ab 100644
--- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
+++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
@@ -1272,15 +1272,17 @@  void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
 
 			for (unsigned which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY;
 				which <= V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE; which++) {
+				struct v4l2_subdev_routing &routing = sd_routing[which];
 
-				sd_routing[which].which = which;
-				sd_routing[which].routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
-				sd_routing[which].num_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
+				routing.which = which;
+				routing.routes = (__u64)sd_routes[which];
+				routing.len_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
+				routing.num_routes = 0;
 
-				ret = doioctl(&node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING, &sd_routing[which]);
+				ret = doioctl(&node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING, &routing);
 				if (ret) {
 					fail("VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING: failed to get routing\n");
-					sd_routing[which].num_routes = 0;
+					routing.num_routes = 0;
 				}
 			}
 		}
diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
index ebca1b94f5c0..714857021fc6 100644
--- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
+++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
@@ -587,17 +587,15 @@  int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which)
 
 	routing.which = which;
 	routing.routes = (__u64)&routes;
+	routing.len_routes = 0;
 	routing.num_routes = 0;
 	memset(routing.reserved, 0xff, sizeof(routing.reserved));
 
-	/*
-	 * First test that G_ROUTING either returns success, or ENOSPC and
-	 * updates num_routes.
-	 */
+	/* First test that G_ROUTING returns success even when len_routes is 0. */
 
 	ret = doioctl(node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING, &routing);
-	fail_on_test(ret && ret != ENOSPC);
-	fail_on_test(ret == ENOSPC && routing.num_routes == 0);
+	fail_on_test(ret);
+	fail_on_test(routing.num_routes > NUM_ROUTES_MAX);
 	fail_on_test(check_0(routing.reserved, sizeof(routing.reserved)));
 
 	if (!routing.num_routes)
@@ -609,7 +607,8 @@  int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which)
 	 */
 
 	uint32_t num_routes = routing.num_routes;
-	routing.num_routes = num_routes + 1;
+	routing.len_routes = NUM_ROUTES_MAX;
+	routing.num_routes = 0;
 	fail_on_test(doioctl(node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING, &routing));
 	fail_on_test(routing.num_routes != num_routes);
 
@@ -633,10 +632,14 @@  int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which)
 		}
 	}
 
-	/* Set the same routes back, which should always succeed. */
+	/*
+	 * Set the same routes back, which should always succeed and report the
+	 * same number of routes.
+	 */
 
 	memset(routing.reserved, 0xff, sizeof(routing.reserved));
 	fail_on_test(doioctl(node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_S_ROUTING, &routing));
+	fail_on_test(routing.num_routes != num_routes);
 	fail_on_test(check_0(routing.reserved, sizeof(routing.reserved)));
 
 	/* Test setting invalid pads */