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.
If you want to fix this, then I think the right fix is to rename num_crtcs
to be something like num_vblank_crtcs. It's a historical accident back
when vblanks without kms was a thing.
Plan B is someone gets really busy and fixes up the entire vblank mess and
moves it into drm_crtc struct. Now that the dri1 drivers are gone we could
indeed do that.
Or maybe instead a patch to improve the kerneldoc for drm_dev->num_crtc?
-Daniel
> 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;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dev_has_vblank);
>
> --
> 2.39.2
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
