On Thu, 06 Feb 2020, Wambui Karuga <wambui.karugax@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -5990,11 +6040,13 @@ int intel_dp_hdcp_write_an_aksv(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port,
> static int intel_dp_hdcp_read_bksv(struct intel_digital_port *intel_dig_port,
> u8 *bksv)
> {
> + struct intel_dp *intel_dp = &intel_dig_port->dp;
> ssize_t ret;
> ret = drm_dp_dpcd_read(&intel_dig_port->dp.aux, DP_AUX_HDCP_BKSV, bksv,
> DRM_HDCP_KSV_LEN);
> if (ret != DRM_HDCP_KSV_LEN) {
> - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Read Bksv from DP/AUX failed (%zd)\n", ret);
> + drm_dbg_kms(&dp_to_i915(intel_dp)->drm,
> + "Read Bksv from DP/AUX failed (%zd)\n", ret);
> return ret >= 0 ? -EIO : ret;
> }
If you're introducing local variables just for logging, I would prefer
it to be i915.
struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(intel_dig_port->base.base.dev);
...
drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, ...);
If you look at dp_to_i915() it actually converts intel_dp back to
intel_digital_port, and then does the above to it, to get at i915. This
is an unnecessary dance.
It's fine to use &dp_to_i915(intel_dp)->drm when there are only a couple
of logging calls in a function, and intel_dp is already there. But any
more than that, and I'd add the i915 local variable. For example, but
not limited to, intel_dp_handle_test_request() would benefit from i915
local var.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
