From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.23024.1661934205523593466 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 01:23:26 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: huawei.com, ip: 45.249.212.188, mailfrom: xiewenyi2@huawei.com) Received: from dggemv711-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.55]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4MHcX249hQzYd40; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:18:58 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemm600004.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.242) by dggemv711-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:23:22 +0800 Received: from [10.174.253.58] (10.174.253.58) by kwepemm600004.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:23:21 +0800 Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IOWbnuWkjTogW2VkazItZGV2ZWxdIOWbnuWkjTogW1BBVENIIEVESzIgdjEgMS8xXSBNZGVNb2R1bGVQa2cvQmFzZUJtcFN1cHBvcnRMaWI6IEZpeCBDb2xvck1hcCBpc3N1ZQ==?= To: gaoliming , , , , CC: References: <20220811083146.3954530-1-xiewenyi2@huawei.com> <20220811083146.3954530-2-xiewenyi2@huawei.com> <170A7FD7925DB3CB.15571@groups.io> <033901d8b20b$ccb57ca0$662075e0$@byosoft.com.cn> From: "wenyi,xie" Message-ID: <130a9cd0-850b-a24e-bf79-72243d183e16@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:23:17 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <033901d8b20b$ccb57ca0$662075e0$@byosoft.com.cn> X-Originating-IP: [10.174.253.58] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To kwepemm600004.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.242) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Liming: This patch didn't pass CI because it had a format problem. I had run Uncr= ustify locally to fixed it and sent a new patch in 8/18. Thanks Wenyi On 2022/8/17 15:34, gaoliming wrote: > Weiyi: > This patch doesn't pass CI. Please check > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/3208 >=20 >> -----=D3=CA=BC=FE=D4=AD=BC=FE----- >> =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: devel@edk2.groups.io =B4=FA= =B1=ED gaoliming via >> groups.io >> =B7=A2=CB=CD=CA=B1=BC=E4: 2022=C4=EA8=D4=C212=C8=D5 12:53 >> =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: 'Wenyi Xie' ; devel@edk2.group= s.io; >> jian.j.wang@intel.com; zhichao.gao@intel.com; ray.ni@intel.com >> =B3=AD=CB=CD: songdongkuang@huawei.com >> =D6=F7=CC=E2: [edk2-devel] =BB=D8=B8=B4: [PATCH EDK2 v1 1/1] >> MdeModulePkg/BaseBmpSupportLib: Fix ColorMap issue >> >> Agree this fix to add the check for this case. Reviewed-by: Liming Gao >> >> >> Thanks >> Liming >>> -----=D3=CA=BC=FE=D4=AD=BC=FE----- >>> =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: Wenyi Xie >>> =B7=A2=CB=CD=CA=B1=BC=E4: 2022=C4=EA8=D4=C211=C8=D5 16:32 >>> =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: devel@edk2.groups.io; jian.j.wang@intel.com; >>> gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn; zhichao.gao@intel.com; ray.ni@intel.com >>> =B3=AD=CB=CD: songdongkuang@huawei.com; xiewenyi2@huawei.com >>> =D6=F7=CC=E2: [PATCH EDK2 v1 1/1] MdeModulePkg/BaseBmpSupportLib: Fix >>> ColorMap issue >>> >>> When BitPerPixel is 1,4,8, there should be a color map in bmp file. But > if >>> the format of bmp file is error, it maybe has no color map when >> BitPerPixel >>> is 1,4,8. The condition checking now can not catch this issue. >>> >>> Cc: Jian J Wang >>> Cc: Liming Gao >>> Cc: Zhichao Gao >>> Cc: Ray Ni >>> Signed-off-by: Wenyi Xie >>> --- >>> MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseBmpSupportLib/BmpSupportLib.c | 5 +++++ >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseBmpSupportLib/BmpSupportLib.c >>> b/MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseBmpSupportLib/BmpSupportLib.c >>> index c5e885d7a6d5..bea89d530de6 100644 >>> --- a/MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseBmpSupportLib/BmpSupportLib.c >>> +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseBmpSupportLib/BmpSupportLib.c >>> @@ -236,6 +236,11 @@ TranslateBmpToGopBlt ( >>> return RETURN_UNSUPPORTED; >>> } >>> >>> + if ((BmpHeader->ImageOffset =3D=3D sizeof (BMP_IMAGE_HEADER)) && >>> + ((BmpHeader->BitPerPixel & 0x0D) !=3D 0)) { >>> + return RETURN_UNSUPPORTED; >>> + } >>> + >>> if (BmpHeader->ImageOffset > sizeof (BMP_IMAGE_HEADER)) { >>> switch (BmpHeader->BitPerPixel) { >>> case 1: >>> -- >>> 2.20.1.windows.1 >> >> >> >> >> >>=20 >> >=20 >=20 >=20 > . >=20