[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Remove redundant HAS_PSR checks

[Daniel Vetter]

We only need to check for this in psr_enable, everything else is
already protect by the dev_priv->psr.enabled checks. Those need the
psr locking, but these functions are called infrequent enough that the
locking overhead is negligible.

Suggested by Chris Wilson.

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 14 --------------
 1 file changed, 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
index 1a8b3d90e422..0c1c77ae16fb 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
@@ -1754,11 +1754,6 @@ static bool intel_edp_psr_match_conditions(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
 
 	dev_priv->psr.source_ok = false;
 
-	if (!HAS_PSR(dev)) {
-		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR not supported on this platform\n");
-		return false;
-	}
-
 	if (IS_HASWELL(dev) && dig_port->port != PORT_A) {
 		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("HSW ties PSR to DDI A (eDP)\n");
 		return false;
@@ -1845,9 +1840,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_disable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
 	struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
 	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
 
-	if (!HAS_PSR(dev))
-		return;
-
 	mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
 	if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
 		mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
@@ -1922,9 +1914,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_invalidate(struct drm_device *dev,
 	struct drm_crtc *crtc;
 	enum pipe pipe;
 
-	if (!HAS_PSR(dev))
-		return;
-
 	mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
 	if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
 		mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
@@ -1949,9 +1938,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_flush(struct drm_device *dev,
 	struct drm_crtc *crtc;
 	enum pipe pipe;
 
-	if (!HAS_PSR(dev))
-		return;
-
 	mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
 	if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
 		mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
-- 
2.0.0