[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 14/21] drm/i915: factor out reset_vblank_counter

[Imre Deak]

We need to do the same for other platforms in upcoming patches.

v2:
- s/p/pipe (Ville)
- Call the new helper with the vbl_lock already held. The part it
  protects is short, so releasing it between pipes only makes proving
  correctness more difficult.

Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 15 +++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
index 78e8989..28fae53 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
@@ -5249,11 +5249,18 @@ static void hsw_power_well_post_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
 	}
 }
 
+static void reset_vblank_counter(struct drm_device *dev, enum pipe pipe)
+{
+	assert_spin_locked(&dev->vbl_lock);
+
+	dev->vblank[pipe].last = 0;
+}
+
 static void hsw_power_well_post_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
 {
 	struct drm_device *dev = dev_priv->dev;
-	enum pipe p;
 	unsigned long irqflags;
+	enum pipe pipe;
 
 	/*
 	 * After this, the registers on the pipes that are part of the power
@@ -5263,9 +5270,9 @@ static void hsw_power_well_post_disable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
 	 * FIXME: Should we do this in general in drm_vblank_post_modeset?
 	 */
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags);
-	for_each_pipe(p)
-		if (p != PIPE_A)
-			dev->vblank[p].last = 0;
+	for_each_pipe(pipe)
+		if (pipe != PIPE_A)
+			reset_vblank_counter(dev, pipe);
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags);
 }
 
-- 
1.8.4