On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 04:49:34PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > 2012/7/12 Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>: > > Instead of having a giant if cascade to figure this out according to > > the passed-in register. We could do quite a bit more cleaning up and > > all by using the port at more places, but I think this should be part > > of a bigger rework to introduce a struct intel_digital_port which > > would keep track of all these things. I guess this will be part of > > some haswell-DP-induced refactoring. > > > > For now this rips out the big cascade, which is what annoyed me so > > much. > > > > v2: Add port variable name back for the func decl (I've tried to trick > > myself below the 80 char limit). > > > > Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> > > Reviewed-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com> I've merged the three patches you've reviewed already to dinq (with the comment in patch 13 fixed up), thanks for the review. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Mail: daniel at ffwll.ch Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
