On Fri, 23 Jan 2026, Jonathan Cavitt <[email protected]> wrote: > Static analysis issue: > > In assert_port_valid, add a check to ensure port != PORT_NONE, as that > is not a valid port. The check must be explicit to prevent a bad bit > shift operation in the general case via short-circuiting. It's not > likely this will ever come up in a real use case, but it's at least > worth guarding against. > > It would probably also be pertinent to modify the behavior of the > port_name function to correctly print PORT_NONE in this case, as > currently the port would be reported as 'port @' by the debugger. But > that should be done separately, and given port_name is mostly just a > debug printing helper function anyways, fixing it is a low priority. > > v2: > - Conditional check was backwards. Fix it. (Jani) > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cavitt <[email protected]> > Cc: Jani Nikula <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > index 7491e00e3858..0c3bb3f98ee4 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c > @@ -7828,7 +7828,8 @@ static bool intel_ddi_crt_present(struct intel_display > *display) > > bool assert_port_valid(struct intel_display *display, enum port port) > { > - return !drm_WARN(display->drm, > !(DISPLAY_RUNTIME_INFO(display)->port_mask & BIT(port)), > + return !drm_WARN(display->drm, > + !(port >= 0 && > DISPLAY_RUNTIME_INFO(display)->port_mask & BIT(port)), > "Platform does not support port %c\n", > port_name(port)); > } -- Jani Nikula, Intel
