On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 05:35:33PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Some drivers are storing the plane->state pointer in atomic_update and
> atomic_disable in a variable simply called state, while the state passed
> as an argument is called old_state.
>
> In order to ease subsequent reworks and to avoid confusing or
> inconsistent names, let's rename those variables to new_state.
>
> This was done using the following coccinelle script, plus some manual
> changes for mtk and tegra.
>
> @ plane_atomic_func @
> identifier helpers;
> identifier func;
> @@
>
> (
> static const struct drm_plane_helper_funcs helpers = {
> ...,
> .atomic_disable = func,
> ...,
> };
> |
> static const struct drm_plane_helper_funcs helpers = {
> ...,
> .atomic_update = func,
> ...,
> };
> )
>
> @ moves_new_state_old_state @
> identifier plane_atomic_func.func;
> identifier plane;
> symbol old_state;
> symbol state;
> @@
>
> func(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_plane_state *old_state)
> {
> ...
> - struct drm_plane_state *state = plane->state;
> + struct drm_plane_state *new_state = plane->state;
> ...
> }
>
> @ depends on moves_new_state_old_state @
> identifier plane_atomic_func.func;
> identifier plane;
> identifier old_state;
> symbol state;
> @@
>
> func(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_plane_state *old_state)
> {
> <...
> - state
> + new_state
> ...>
Was going to say that this migh eat something else, but I guess
the dependency prevents that?
Another way to avoid that I suppose would be to declare 'state'
as
symbol moves_new_state_old_state.state;
That would probably make the intent a bit more obvious, even with
the dependency. Or does a dependency somehow automagically imply
that?
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
