On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 09:27:41PM -0400, Ilija Hadzic wrote: > (dropping stable@... until we get the fix we can agree on) > > While looking through that function (drm_crtc_helper_set_config) to > figure out what we really need to save and restore, I came across a > piece of code that you added in 25f397a4. The 'if (connector->dpms != > DRM_MODE_DPMS_ON)' (line 719 in the version that is on the top of > Dave's drm-next branch), comes right after the unconditional break, is > unreachable code (and removing it produces the same object code). Can > you explain what your intent was here? Also, the comment above the > break that reads "don't break so fail path works correct[sic]" doesn't > make much sense to me either. The idea was to also remove the break there. I just haven't had the time yet to fix this fumble and test it a bit. For the funny commment I think this is just to avoid the code in the outer for loop wrestling with the connector->encoder pointer. Removing the comment and inline the ret = -EINVAL; goto fail; would be clearer code imo. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
