[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZCr9jrhTyGuZA+Qt@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 19:23:42 +0300
From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>
To: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/vblank: Simplify drm_dev_has_vblank()
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:07:35AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
>
> What does vblank have to do with num_crtcs? Well, this was technically
> correct, but you'd have to go look at where num_crtcs is initialized to
> understand why. Lets just replace it with the simpler and more obvious
> check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> index 877e2067534f..ad34c235d853 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_vblank_init);
> */
> bool drm_dev_has_vblank(const struct drm_device *dev)
> {
> - return dev->num_crtcs != 0;
> + return !!dev->vblank;
The compiler knows how to turn things into a boolean.
Or I guess if we want to be a bit more explicit we could
write this as
return dev->vblank != NULL;
but IIRC that will make checkpatch complain because of
someone's personal taste.
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dev_has_vblank);
>
> --
> 2.39.2
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists