[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/26] drm: Consolidate connector arrays in drm_atomic_state

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 05:59:24PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 08:35:05PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > It's kinda pointless to have 2 separate mallocs for these. And when we
> > add more per-connector state in the future it's even more pointless.
> > 
> > Right now there's no such thing planned, but both Gustavo's per-crtc
> > fence patches, and some nonblocking commit helpers I'm playing around
> > with will add more per-crtc stuff. It makes sense to also consolidate
> > connectors, just for consistency.
> > 
> > In the future we can use this to store a pointer to the preceeding
> > state, making an atomic update entirely free-standing. This will be
> > needed to be able to queue them up with a depth > 1.
> > 
> > Cc: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo at padovan.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c        | 27 +++++++++------------------
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c |  2 +-
> >  include/drm/drm_atomic.h            | 10 +++++-----
> >  include/drm/drm_crtc.h              | 11 +++++++----
> >  4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> > index 3ff1ed7b33db..a6395e9654af 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c
> > @@ -44,7 +44,6 @@
> >  void drm_atomic_state_default_release(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
> >  {
> >  	kfree(state->connectors);
> > -	kfree(state->connector_states);
> >  	kfree(state->crtcs);
> >  	kfree(state->crtc_states);
> >  	kfree(state->planes);
> > @@ -139,15 +138,15 @@ void drm_atomic_state_default_clear(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
> >  	DRM_DEBUG_ATOMIC("Clearing atomic state %p\n", state);
> >  
> >  	for (i = 0; i < state->num_connector; i++) {
> > -		struct drm_connector *connector = state->connectors[i];
> > +		struct drm_connector *connector = state->connectors[i].ptr;
> 
> 'ptr' is not a very good name.

Suggestions for something better? I was lacking good inspiration ...
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch