Hi Mauro and thanks for the review,

On Thu 17 Oct 19, 09:57, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Fri, 27 Sep 2019 16:34:11 +0200
> Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com> escreveu:
> 
> > This introduces support for HEVC/H.265 to the Cedrus VPU driver, with
> > both uni-directional and bi-directional prediction modes supported.
> > 
> > Field-coded (interlaced) pictures, custom quantization matrices and
> > 10-bit output are not supported at this point.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski <paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com>
> > ---
> 
> ...
> 
> > +		unsigned int ctb_size_luma =
> > +			1 << log2_max_luma_coding_block_size;
> 
> Shifts like this is a little scary. "1" constant is signed. So, if
> log2_max_luma_coding_block_size is 31, the above logic has undefined
> behavior. Different archs and C compilers may handle it on different
> ways.

I wasn't aware that it was the case, thanks for bringing this to light!
I'll make it 1UL then.

> > +#define VE_DEC_H265_LOW_ADDR_PRIMARY_CHROMA(a) \
> > +	(((a) << 24) & GENMASK(31, 24))
> 
> Same applies here and on other similar macros. You need to enforce
> (a) to be unsigned, as otherwise the behavior is undefined.
> 
> Btw, this is a recurrent pattern on this file. I would define a
> macro, e. g. something like:
> 
> 	#define MASK_BITS_AND_SHIFT(v, high, low) \
> 		((UL(v) << low) & GENMASK(high, low))
> 
> And use it for all similar patterns here.

Sounds good! I find that the reverse wording (SHIFT_AND_MASK_BITS) would be
a bit more explicit since the shift happens prior to the mask.

Also we probably need to have parenthesis around "low", right?

> The best would be to include such macro at linux/bits.h, although some
> upstream discussion is required.
> 
> So, for now, let's add it at this header file, but work upstream
> to have it merged there.

Understood, I'll include it in that header for now and send a separate patch
for inclusion in linux/bits.h (apparently the preprocessor doesn't care about
redefinitions so we can just remove the cedrus fashion once the common one is
in).

What do you think?

Cheers,

Paul