Comment # 3
on bug 91481
from Adam J. Richter
Hi, Dave. Thank you for posting your patch to the dri-devel mailing list (at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.dri.devel/136173 ). Your patch is probably fine in practice, although I am not sure it deals correctly with the the ways of drm_dp_send_link_address can fail. Part of the reason I made my patch the way I did was that I guessed that if the kzalloc at the beginning of drm_dp_send_link_address failed (which probably will never happen), that it might be better not to set link_address_sent to true. On the other hand, I was not sure what to do with the "link address failed" and "link address nak received" cases in that function. Perhaps link_address_sent should not be set in those cases either. Anyhow, pushing your patch upstream would certainly be an improvement. I'm all for it if you think you patch is actually correct in these cases too, or if you want to push your patch upstream and think about corner cases later. If you do have any thoughts on these corner cases, your comments would be most welcome of course. Thanks again for addressing this bug.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
