linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] drm/ssd130x: Store the HW buffer in the driver-private CRTC state

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <b4gfkcv3zdtdgcpucufwfmi7225redkxll75gr72zdirqtrrj4@u4kvevdmhtvt>
Date:   Thu, 14 Sep 2023 16:15:53 +0200
From:   Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] drm/ssd130x: Store the HW buffer in the
 driver-private CRTC state

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 03:23:53PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org> writes:
> 
> Hello Maxime,
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 07:29:25AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >>  static const struct drm_crtc_helper_funcs ssd130x_crtc_helper_funcs = {
> >>  	.mode_valid = ssd130x_crtc_helper_mode_valid,
> >> -	.atomic_check = drm_crtc_helper_atomic_check,
> >> +	.atomic_check = ssd130x_crtc_helper_atomic_check,
> >>  };
> >
> > Sorry I didn't catch that sooner, but there's no reason to call that
> > function a helper.
> >
> 
> Yeah, agreed that there's no reason but others drivers already add the
> _helper prefix for struct drm_*_helper_funcs callbacks, and I did that
> in this driver as well to follow (what appears to be?) a convention.

From a quick grep, it looks like it's the exception rather than the norm

> So I've to that now for the struct drm_crtc_helper_funcs handlers to be
> consistent with the rest of the driver, e.g for plane:
> 
> static const struct drm_plane_helper_funcs ssd130x_primary_plane_helper_funcs = {
> 	DRM_GEM_SHADOW_PLANE_HELPER_FUNCS,
> 	.atomic_check = ssd130x_primary_plane_helper_atomic_check,
> 	.atomic_update = ssd130x_primary_plane_helper_atomic_update,
> 	.atomic_disable = ssd130x_primary_plane_helper_atomic_disable,
> };
> 
> static const struct drm_plane_funcs ssd130x_primary_plane_funcs = {
> 	.update_plane = drm_atomic_helper_update_plane,
> 	.disable_plane = drm_atomic_helper_disable_plane,
> 	.reset = ssd130x_primary_plane_reset,
> 	.atomic_duplicate_state = ssd130x_primary_plane_duplicate_state,
> 	.atomic_destroy_state = ssd130x_primary_plane_destroy_state,
> 	.destroy = drm_plane_cleanup,
> };

Ack.

I still believe we should be removing the helper part, those are not
helpers. But it's not a big deal anyway.

Maxime

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)