Hello Thomas,
On 9/5/22 12:57, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
Hi Javier
Am 31.08.22 um 13:12 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
The simpledrm_primary_plane_helper_atomic_check() function is more complex
than needed. It first checks drm_atomic_helper_check_plane_state() returns
value to decide whether to return this or zero.
But it could just return that function return value directly. It also does
a check if new_plane_state->visible isn't set, but returns zero regardless.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/simpledrm.c | 15 ++++-----------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/simpledrm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/simpledrm.c
index a81f91814595..0be47f40247a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/simpledrm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tiny/simpledrm.c
@@ -485,21 +485,14 @@ static int simpledrm_primary_plane_helper_atomic_check(struct drm_plane *plane,
struct drm_plane_state *new_plane_state = drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state(new_state, plane);
struct drm_crtc *new_crtc = new_plane_state->crtc;
struct drm_crtc_state *new_crtc_state = NULL;
- int ret;
if (new_crtc)
new_crtc_state = drm_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(new_state, new_crtc);
- ret = drm_atomic_helper_check_plane_state(new_plane_state, new_crtc_state,
- DRM_PLANE_NO_SCALING,
- DRM_PLANE_NO_SCALING,
- false, false);
- if (ret)
- return ret;
- else if (!new_plane_state->visible)
- return 0;
-
- return 0;
+ return drm_atomic_helper_check_plane_state(new_plane_state, new_crtc_state,
+ DRM_PLANE_NO_SCALING,
+ DRM_PLANE_NO_SCALING,
+ false, false);
I'm undecided on this change. I know it's correct and more to the point.
But the call's logic is non-intuitive: the call either returns an error
or we have to test ->visible afterwards. So I wrote it explicitly.
Yes, but the check has no effect so I found it even less intuitive. Maybe
add a comment then if you wan to keep the current code?
I saw that your change to ssd130x also uses the pattern. If we find more
such drivers, we could implement the atomic check as a helper. I suggest
drm_plane_helper_atomic_check_fixed() in drm_plane_helper.c
Sure. I can add a preparatory change in v2 that adds that helper and then
use it in the follow-up patch.
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature