Message ID | 20170712081344.25495-6-maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Reviewed-by: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:13:33AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > I don't think the checking of resources in this function is very > atomic-like, but it should definitely not use a macro that's about > to be removed. > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> > Cc: VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com> > Cc: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> > Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > index 1cd67b10a0d9..64f66ff97fab 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > @@ -1536,8 +1536,7 @@ vmw_kms_atomic_check_modeset(struct drm_device *dev, > struct vmw_private *dev_priv = vmw_priv(dev); > int i; > > - > - for_each_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) { > + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) { > unsigned long requested_bb_mem = 0; > > if (dev_priv->active_display_unit == vmw_du_screen_target) { > -- > 2.11.0 >
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:13:33AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > I don't think the checking of resources in this function is very > atomic-like, but it should definitely not use a macro that's about > to be removed. > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> > Cc: VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com> > Cc: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> > Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > index 1cd67b10a0d9..64f66ff97fab 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > @@ -1536,8 +1536,7 @@ vmw_kms_atomic_check_modeset(struct drm_device *dev, Afaics vmw_kms_atomic_check_modeset should be static. Feel free to include or not include that bikeshed. Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> > struct vmw_private *dev_priv = vmw_priv(dev); > int i; > > - > - for_each_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) { > + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) { > unsigned long requested_bb_mem = 0; > > if (dev_priv->active_display_unit == vmw_du_screen_target) { > -- > 2.11.0 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:09:16AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:13:33AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > > I don't think the checking of resources in this function is very > > atomic-like, but it should definitely not use a macro that's about > > to be removed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com> > > Cc: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> > > Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c | 3 +-- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > > index 1cd67b10a0d9..64f66ff97fab 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c > > @@ -1536,8 +1536,7 @@ vmw_kms_atomic_check_modeset(struct drm_device *dev, > > Afaics vmw_kms_atomic_check_modeset should be static. Feel free to include > or not include that bikeshed. > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Yeah, good point.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c index 1cd67b10a0d9..64f66ff97fab 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c @@ -1536,8 +1536,7 @@ vmw_kms_atomic_check_modeset(struct drm_device *dev, struct vmw_private *dev_priv = vmw_priv(dev); int i; - - for_each_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) { + for_each_new_crtc_in_state(state, crtc, crtc_state, i) { unsigned long requested_bb_mem = 0; if (dev_priv->active_display_unit == vmw_du_screen_target) {
I don't think the checking of resources in this function is very atomic-like, but it should definitely not use a macro that's about to be removed. Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> Cc: VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com> Cc: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)