On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 09:23:11AM -0700, Stéphane Marchesin wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Ville Syrjälä > <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 07:28:14PM -0700, Stéphane Marchesin wrote: > >> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Ville Syrjälä > >> <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 10:26:36AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > >> > > El Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:56:05PM -0700 Matthias Kaehlcke ha dit: > >> > > > >> > > > In several instances the driver passes an 'enum pipe' value to a > >> > > > function expecting an 'enum transcoder' and viceversa. Since PIPE_x and > >> > > > TRANSCODER_x have the same values this doesn't cause functional > >> > > > problems. Still it is incorrect and causes clang to generate warnings > >> > > > like this: > >> > > > > >> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c:1844:34: warning: implicit > >> > > > conversion from enumeration type 'enum transcoder' to different > >> > > > enumeration type 'enum pipe' [-Wenum-conversion] > >> > > > assert_fdi_rx_enabled(dev_priv, TRANSCODER_A); > >> > > > > >> > > > Change the code to pass values of the type expected by the callee. > >> > > > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > > --- > >> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 4 ++-- > >> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 6 ++++-- > >> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_hdmi.c | 6 ++++-- > >> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c | 6 ++++-- > >> > > > 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >> > > > >> > > Ping, any comments on this patch? > >> > > >> > I'm not convinced the patch is making things any better really. To > >> > fix this really properly, I think we'd need to introduce a new enum > >> > pch_transcoder and thus avoid the confusion of which type of > >> > transcoder we're talking about. Currently most places expect an > >> > enum pipe when dealing with PCH transcoders, and enum transcoder > >> > when dealing with CPU transcoders. But there are some exceptions > >> > of course. > >> > >> > >> I don't follow -- these functions take an enum transcoder; what's > >> wrong about passing what they expect? It seems like what you are > >> asking for has nothing to do with the warning here... > > > > There's a warning? I don't get any. > > Yup, clang generates a warning. > > > > > Anyways, I just don't see much point in blindly changing the types > > because it doesn't actually solve the underlying confusion for human > > readers. It might even make it worse, not sure. > > The function expects type A, you pass type B, how can that ever be the > right thing to do? Because maybe the function should be taking in type B instead. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
