On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 06:34:28PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > Noticed this while fixing another issue in drm_dp_read_downstream_info(), > the open coded DP_DOWNSTREAMPORT_PRESENT check here just duplicates what we > already do in drm_dp_is_branch(), so just get rid of it. > > Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c > index 27c8c5bdf7d9..0f84df8798ab 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c > @@ -677,9 +677,7 @@ int drm_dp_read_downstream_info(struct drm_dp_aux *aux, > memset(downstream_ports, 0, DP_MAX_DOWNSTREAM_PORTS); > > /* No downstream info to read */ > - if (!drm_dp_is_branch(dpcd) || > - dpcd[DP_DPCD_REV] < DP_DPCD_REV_10 || > - !(dpcd[DP_DOWNSTREAMPORT_PRESENT] & DP_DWN_STRM_PORT_PRESENT)) > + if (!drm_dp_is_branch(dpcd) || dpcd[DP_DPCD_REV] < DP_DPCD_REV_10) BTW that DPCD_REV check looks rather wrong. Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > return 0; > > /* Some branches advertise having 0 downstream ports, despite also advertising they have a > -- > 2.30.2 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Ville Syrjälä Intel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
