linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] drm/fourcc: Pass the format_info pointer to drm_format_plane

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190510160031.GM24299@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 May 2019 19:00:31 +0300
From:   Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] drm/fourcc: Pass the format_info pointer to
 drm_format_plane_cpp

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 01:08:49PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> So far, the drm_format_plane_cpp function was operating on the format's
> fourcc and was doing a lookup to retrieve the drm_format_info structure and
> return the cpp.
> 
> However, this is inefficient since in most cases, we will have the
> drm_format_info pointer already available so we shouldn't have to perform a
> new lookup. Some drm_fourcc functions also already operate on the
> drm_format_info pointer for that reason, so the API is quite inconsistent
> there.
> 
> Let's follow the latter pattern and remove the extra lookup while being a
> bit more consistent. In order to be extra consistent, also rename that
> function to drm_format_info_plane_cpp and to a static function in the
> header to match the current policy.

Is there any point keeping the function at all?
It's just info->cpp[i] no?

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel