[Intel-gfx] [PATCH RESEND] drm/i915: Fix pipe/transcoder enum mismatches

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 07:28:14PM -0700, Stéphane Marchesin wrote:
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä
> <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 10:26:36AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > > El Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:56:05PM -0700 Matthias Kaehlcke ha dit:
> > >
> > > > In several instances the driver passes an 'enum pipe' value to a
> > > > function expecting an 'enum transcoder' and viceversa. Since PIPE_x and
> > > > TRANSCODER_x have the same values this doesn't cause functional
> > > > problems. Still it is incorrect and causes clang to generate warnings
> > > > like this:
> > > >
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c:1844:34: warning: implicit
> > > >   conversion from enumeration type 'enum transcoder' to different
> > > >   enumeration type 'enum pipe' [-Wenum-conversion]
> > > >     assert_fdi_rx_enabled(dev_priv, TRANSCODER_A);
> > > >
> > > > Change the code to pass values of the type expected by the callee.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka at chromium.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 4 ++--
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c      | 6 ++++--
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c    | 6 ++++--
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c    | 6 ++++--
> > > >  4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Ping, any comments on this patch?
> >
> > I'm not convinced the patch is making things any better really. To
> > fix this really properly, I think we'd need to introduce a new enum
> > pch_transcoder and thus avoid the confusion of which type of
> > transcoder we're talking about. Currently most places expect an
> > enum pipe when dealing with PCH transcoders, and enum transcoder
> > when dealing with CPU transcoders. But there are some exceptions
> > of course.
> 
> 
> I don't follow -- these functions take an enum transcoder; what's
> wrong about passing what they expect? It seems like what you are
> asking for has nothing to do with the warning here...

There's a warning? I don't get any.

Anyways, I just don't see much point in blindly changing the types
because it doesn't actually solve the underlying confusion for human
readers. It might even make it worse, not sure.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC