On 23.10.2012 18:45, Klaus Schnass wrote:
/**
+ * radeon_check_pot_argument - check that argument is a power of two
+ *
+ * @arg: value to check
+ *
+ * Validates that a certain argument is a power of two (all asics).
+ * Returns true if argument is valid.
+ */
+static bool radeon_ckeck_pot_argument(int arg)
+{
+ return (arg & (arg - 1)) == 0;
+}
comment says "check_pot_argument" but is called c_K_eck_pot_argument
Good catch, that's indeed a typo.
+
+/**
* radeon_check_arguments - validate module params
*
* @rdev: radeon_device pointer
@@ -845,52 +860,25 @@ static unsigned int radeon_vga_set_decode(void *cookie,
bool state)
static void radeon_check_arguments(struct radeon_device *rdev)
{
/* vramlimit must be a power of two */
- switch (radeon_vram_limit) {
- case 0:
- case 4:
- case 8:
- case 16:
- case 32:
- case 64:
- case 128:
- case 256:
- case 512:
- case 1024:
- case 2048:
- case 4096:
- break;
- default:
+ if (!radeon_ckeck_pot_argument(radeon_vram_limit)) {
check_pot_argument is also true for radeon_vram_limit = 1 and 2 which was
missing from the previous case statement, was that intentional?
Not really, but I don't see a reason why 1 and 2 MB limits shouldn't
work (if your resolution is low enough).
Christian.
Best regards,
Klaus
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
