On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 01:52:32PM +0100, Matthew Auld wrote:
> I believe you're thinking of:
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/77191/
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/77192/
> 
> Although they don't test for multiple rotation values...

I guess you could just

for (rotation = 0; rotation < 0x40; rotation++)
        if (!is_power_of_2(rotation & 0xf) ||
            (rotation & ~supported) != 0)
                // expect failure
}

if you want to be really sure invalid crap won't get through.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC

Reply via email to