[Intel-gfx] [RFC 2/3] drm/i915: create intel_update_pipe_size()

[Gustavo Padovan]

2014-09-09 Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com>:

> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 11:43:20AM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan at collabora.co.uk>
> > 
> > Factor out a piece of code from intel_pipe_set_base() that updates
> > the pipe size and adjust fitter.
> > 
> > This will help refactor the update primary plane path.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan at collabora.co.uk>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 71 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> >  1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > index 2ccf7c0..e7e7184 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> > @@ -2779,6 +2779,46 @@ static bool intel_crtc_has_pending_flip(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> >  	return pending;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void intel_update_pipe_size(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> 
> These days we usually prefer to pass intel_crtc instead of drm_crtc. You
> can still call it 'crtc' since that's shorter and because we don't need
> anything from drm_crtc in this function there won't be any confusion
> between the two.

Actually we need the drm_crtc 3 times in this function, that is why I left it
as an argument. We could just do the other way around and get it from
&intel_crtc->base.

	Gustavo