[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YI9otSh/ftvLqMxb@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 06:06:29 +0300
From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
To: Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/dp: Drop open-coded
drm_dp_is_branch() in drm_dp_read_downstream_info()
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 06:34:28PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> Noticed this while fixing another issue in drm_dp_read_downstream_info(),
> the open coded DP_DOWNSTREAMPORT_PRESENT check here just duplicates what we
> already do in drm_dp_is_branch(), so just get rid of it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c
> index 27c8c5bdf7d9..0f84df8798ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c
> @@ -677,9 +677,7 @@ int drm_dp_read_downstream_info(struct drm_dp_aux *aux,
> memset(downstream_ports, 0, DP_MAX_DOWNSTREAM_PORTS);
>
> /* No downstream info to read */
> - if (!drm_dp_is_branch(dpcd) ||
> - dpcd[DP_DPCD_REV] < DP_DPCD_REV_10 ||
> - !(dpcd[DP_DOWNSTREAMPORT_PRESENT] & DP_DWN_STRM_PORT_PRESENT))
> + if (!drm_dp_is_branch(dpcd) || dpcd[DP_DPCD_REV] < DP_DPCD_REV_10)
BTW that DPCD_REV check looks rather wrong.
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
> return 0;
>
> /* Some branches advertise having 0 downstream ports, despite also advertising they have a
> --
> 2.30.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists