On 11/28/2016 4:54 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2016, Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/23/2016 10:02 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:48:23PM +0530, Animesh Manna wrote:
Guid is changed for bxt platform, so corrected the guid for bxt.
v1: Initial version as RFC.
v2: Based on review comment from Jani and David,
have kept guid as binary format.
Signed-off-by: Ananth Krishna R <ananth.krishna.r@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Bharath K Veera <bharath.k.veera@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
mode change 100644 => 100755 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
old mode 100644
new mode 100755
3 people handled this patch and none complained about making
intel_acpi.c executable? What does happen when you try to execute it?
oh, will correct it in the next patchset.
index eb638a1..8c878ab
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
acpi_handle dhandle;
} intel_dsm_priv;
-static const u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = {
+static u8 intel_dsm_guid[] = {
Why drop the const?
intel_dsm_guid is not updated anywhere, it used to assign it to a common
pointer based on platform check in my current implementation.
we can explicitly typecast to avoid compilation warning to a normal
pointer which will be used during dsm probe. Hope it will be fine.
Please let me know for any concern/suggestion.
Doh, you use 'const u8 *guid', of course. The acpi_check_dsm uuid
parameter is also const u8 *.
BR,
Jani.
Ok.
0xd3, 0x73, 0xd8, 0x7e,
0xd0, 0xc2,
0x4f, 0x4e,
@@ -23,6 +23,14 @@
0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c
};
+static u8 intel_dsm_guid_bxt[] = {
Missing const.
Explained above.
+ 0xc6, 0x41, 0x5b, 0x3e,
+ 0x1d, 0xeb,
+ 0x60, 0x42,
+ 0x9d, 0x15,
+ 0xc7, 0x1f, 0xba, 0xda, 0xe4, 0x14
+};
+
static char *intel_dsm_port_name(u8 id)
{
switch (id) {
@@ -113,12 +121,20 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void)
static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev)
{
acpi_handle dhandle;
+ struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
dev == dev_priv, just a rose by another name. Use to_i915();
+ u8 *guid;
Missing const.
Explained above.
dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev);
if (!dhandle)
return false;
- if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID,
+ if (IS_BROXTON(dev_priv))
+ guid = intel_dsm_guid_bxt;
+ else
+ guid = intel_dsm_guid;
+
+ if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID,
1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) {
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n");
return false;
--
1.9.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
