On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:07:35AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> What does vblank have to do with num_crtcs? Well, this was technically
> correct, but you'd have to go look at where num_crtcs is initialized to
> understand why. Lets just replace it with the simpler and more obvious
> check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> index 877e2067534f..ad34c235d853 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_vblank_init);
> */
> bool drm_dev_has_vblank(const struct drm_device *dev)
> {
> - return dev->num_crtcs != 0;
> + return !!dev->vblank;
The compiler knows how to turn things into a boolean.
Or I guess if we want to be a bit more explicit we could
write this as
return dev->vblank != NULL;
but IIRC that will make checkpatch complain because of
someone's personal taste.
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dev_has_vblank);
>
> --
> 2.39.2
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
