On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Dhinakaran Pandiyan
<dhinakaran.pandiyan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The caller already has code to handle failure, no need to duplicate
> that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 6 ------
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> index 3f2ca10ccbcd..2886a2ef1591 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
> @@ -4232,13 +4232,7 @@ intel_dp_check_mst_status(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> ret = 0;
> }
> } else {
> - struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port = dp_to_dig_port(intel_dp);
> -
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("failed to get ESI - device may have failed\n");
> - intel_dp->is_mst = false;
> - drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr_set_mst(&intel_dp->mst_mgr,
> - intel_dp->is_mst);
> - drm_kms_helper_hotplug_event(intel_dig_port->base.base.dev);
It looks like intel_dp_hpd_pulse doesn't call
drm_kms_helper_hotplug_event on a failure in
intel_dp_check_mst_status, so we would lose that path with this patch
- do we need that?
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
> return ret;
> --
> 2.11.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
James Ausmus
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
