On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:47:09PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Pass a local acpi_handle around instead of having a static dsm priv
> structure. If we need it later, we can always move it to dev_priv, and
> the change at hand will make that easier as well.
>
> Care is taken to preserve old behaviour, particularly using the last
> non-NULL acpi handle, whether it makes sense or not.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 27 +++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
> index d1abf4bb7c81..6ba478e57b9b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
> @@ -12,10 +12,6 @@
> #define INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID 1 /* For Calpella anyway... */
> #define INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO 1 /* No args */
>
> -static struct intel_dsm_priv {
> - acpi_handle dhandle;
> -} intel_dsm_priv;
> -
> static const guid_t intel_dsm_guid =
> GUID_INIT(0x7ed873d3, 0xc2d0, 0x4e4f,
> 0xa8, 0x54, 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c);
> @@ -72,12 +68,12 @@ static char *intel_dsm_mux_type(u8 type)
> }
> }
>
> -static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void)
> +static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(acpi_handle dhandle)
> {
> int i;
> union acpi_object *pkg, *connector_count;
>
> - pkg = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(intel_dsm_priv.dhandle, &intel_dsm_guid,
> + pkg = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(dhandle, &intel_dsm_guid,
> INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO,
> NULL, ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE);
> if (!pkg) {
> @@ -107,41 +103,40 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void)
> ACPI_FREE(pkg);
> }
>
> -static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +static acpi_handle intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> {
> acpi_handle dhandle;
>
> dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev);
> if (!dhandle)
> - return false;
> + return NULL;
>
> if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, &intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID,
> 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) {
> DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n");
> - return false;
> + return NULL;
> }
>
> - intel_dsm_priv.dhandle = dhandle;
> - intel_dsm_platform_mux_info();
> + intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(dhandle);
>
> - return true;
> + return dhandle;
> }
>
> static bool intel_dsm_detect(void)
> {
> + acpi_handle dhandle = NULL;
> char acpi_method_name[255] = { 0 };
> struct acpi_buffer buffer = {sizeof(acpi_method_name), acpi_method_name};
> struct pci_dev *pdev = NULL;
> - bool has_dsm = false;
> int vga_count = 0;
>
> while ((pdev = pci_get_class(PCI_CLASS_DISPLAY_VGA << 8, pdev)) != NULL) {
> vga_count++;
> - has_dsm |= intel_dsm_pci_probe(pdev);
> + dhandle = intel_dsm_pci_probe(pdev) ?: dhandle;
I *think* gcc promises not to evaluate things twice with ?:, so
should be safe even if intel_dsm_pci_probe() has some side effects.
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> }
>
> - if (vga_count == 2 && has_dsm) {
> - acpi_get_name(intel_dsm_priv.dhandle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, &buffer);
> + if (vga_count == 2 && dhandle) {
> + acpi_get_name(dhandle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, &buffer);
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("vga_switcheroo: detected DSM switching method %s handle\n",
> acpi_method_name);
> return true;
> --
> 2.11.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
