On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:34:50AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Checking for both an irq number _and_ whether it's enabled is > redundant. Also this will breakd drivers which do their own irq > management and just set dev->irq_enabled once the irq stuff is all set > up. I don't think it'll break such drivers because they shouldn't have DRIVER_HAVE_IRQ set in the first place. > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > index c0c6bdedefef..85d88cadc543 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c > @@ -1186,7 +1186,7 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, > unsigned int flags, seq, crtc, high_crtc; > > if (drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_HAVE_IRQ)) > - if ((!drm_dev_to_irq(dev)) || (!dev->irq_enabled)) > + if (!dev->irq_enabled) In fact, unbreaking drivers was one of the reasons I added this check a few months back (see commit 03f6509df921 'drm: Allow vblank support without DRIVER_HAVE_IRQ'). At the time I could've probably removed the call to drm_dev_to_irq() as well. I'm now thinking that perhaps we could remove the DRIVER_HAVE_IRQ check altogether now, given how I've had to explicitly make the Tegra driver set dev->irq_enabled since there are other places that require it to be set (amongst other things the conditional wait further below in the drm_wait_vblank() function). See commit 603f0cc9482e 'drm/tegra: Explicitly set irq_enabled'. Thierry
Attachment:
pgpjw6F7EjYxn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
