On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:50:41PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/armada/armada_overlay.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/armada/armada_overlay.c > index 34cb73d0db77..b54fd8cbd3a6 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/armada/armada_overlay.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/armada/armada_overlay.c > @@ -94,7 +94,8 @@ static int > armada_ovl_plane_update(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_crtc *crtc, > struct drm_framebuffer *fb, > int crtc_x, int crtc_y, unsigned crtc_w, unsigned crtc_h, > - uint32_t src_x, uint32_t src_y, uint32_t src_w, uint32_t src_h) > + uint32_t src_x, uint32_t src_y, uint32_t src_w, uint32_t src_h, > + struct drm_modeset_acquire_ctx *ctx) I'm rather unhappy that we're ending up with a function taking soo many arguments. Most of these have to be stacked on ARM, and I'm guessing most architectures end up doing something similar. Is there a reason why we don't pass pointers to drm_rect's or maybe even consider passing the drm_plane_state structure in? I've found that, when cleaning up these code paths in armada, that storing all the parameters into a drm_plane_state and then validating it with drm_plane_helper_check_state() is by way the simplest solution, and of course, it's forward-compatible with atomic modeset. -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
