[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: Make *_crtc_mode_set work on new_config

[Daniel Vetter]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:18:03PM +0300, Ander Conselvan de Oliveira wrote:
> On 10/09/2014 12:11 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 06:32:21PM +0300, Ander Conselvan de Oliveira wrote:
> >>From: Ander Conselvan de Oliveira <ander.conselvan.de.oliveira at intel.com>
> >>
> >>This shouldn't change the behavior of those functions, since they are
> >>called after the new_config is made effective and that points to the
> >>current config. In a follow up patch, the mode set sequence will be
> >>changed so this is called before disabling crtcs, and in that case
> >>those functions should work on the staged config.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Ander Conselvan de Oliveira <ander.conselvan.de.oliveira at intel.com>
> >>---
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> >>index 3a06c3d..9d8fe8d 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> >>@@ -420,13 +420,32 @@ static bool intel_pipe_has_type(struct drm_crtc *crtc, int type)
> >>   return false;
> >>  }
> >>
> >>+/**
> >>+ * Returns whether any output on the specified pipe will have the specified
> >>+ * type after a staged modeset is complete, i.e., the same as
> >>+ * intel_pipe_has_type() but looking at encoder->new_crtc instead of
> >>+ * encoder->crtc.
> >>+ */
> >>+static bool intel_pipe_will_have_type(struct drm_crtc *crtc, int type)
> >
> >s/drm_crtc/intel_crtc/. In general we use the most specific type
> >for internal functions to avoid tons of upcasting. So you might want to
> >throw a patch on top to convert the existing has_type for consistency.
> 
> What about the functions in drm_i915_display_funcs (find_dpll,
> crtc_mode_set)? Are these not considered internal functions or is this
> leftover from before this rule was in place?
> 
> If I write that consistency patch it might be easier to just convert
> everything.

leftovers, and we've been slowly converting existing code over to using
intel structures over the past 2 years. I certainly won't stop you to
clean up all that stuff, but it's a bit of work. So I'm ok if you just
have the vfunc signature use the intel_ types and then immediately convert
to a drm_ type again to avoid code churn.

Or just convert it all if you feel like it.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch