[PATCH 5/9] drm/xe/display: Drop xe_display_driver_remove()

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 10:19:10PM +0000, Cavitt, Jonathan wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Intel-xe <intel-xe-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Lucas De Marchi
>Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 1:23 PM
>To: intel-xe at lists.freedesktop.org
>Cc: De Marchi, Lucas <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>; Vivi, Rodrigo <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>; Nikula, Jani <jani.nikula at intel.com>
>Subject: [PATCH 5/9] drm/xe/display: Drop xe_display_driver_remove()
>>
>> Handle it as part of xe_display_fini(). The error handling was already
>> calling it if a step after xe_display_init() failed. Just re-use the
>> same xe_display_fini() for driver remove.
>>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
>
>Looks good to me, though we can probably remove the first
>sentence of the commit message as it makes it sound like
>we're adding the functionality into xe_display_fini, rather than
>leveraging functionality that's already there.

humn... I'm confused. See below

>Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt at intel.com>
>-Jonathan Cavitt
>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c | 11 +----------
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.h |  1 -
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c          |  8 ++------
>>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> index 5ad2c99a9ae74..b7c99b8df11f9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> @@ -170,6 +170,7 @@ static void xe_display_fini(void *arg)
>>  	intel_hpd_poll_fini(xe);
>>  	intel_hdcp_component_fini(display);
>>  	intel_audio_deinit(display);
>> +	intel_display_driver_remove(display);

^ here

what I meant is that we don't have to do this manually from
xe_device_remove(). We can just do it from xe_display_fini()
that is already called by the cleanup functions.

Do you think a reword would be better?

thanks
Lucas De Marchi