On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 01:23:18PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > On 2020-03-18 at 18:48:27 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 12:39:17AM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 02:06:32PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > > >Allow 3-display pipes SKU system with any combination > > > >in INTEL_INFO pipe mask. > > > >B.Spec:50075 > > > > > > > >changes since RFC: > > > >- using intel_pipe_mask_is_valid() function to check integrity of > > > > pipe_mask. [Ville] > > > >v2: > > > >- simplify condition in intel_pipe_mask_is_valid(). [Ville] > > > >v3: > > > >- removed non-contiguous pipe fusing check. [Lucas] > > > > > > I'd also say in the commit message that the support for non-contiguous > > > pipe fusing is *already* supported in the driver. So this check here > > > doesn't make sense anymore and since it's an unlike condition we > > > can just stop checking. > > > > BTW I think we still have those crtc index==pipe asserts in the code > > somewhere. Now that all the (known) assumptions have been fixed we can > > remove the WARNs. > yes we still have drm_WARN_ON(&dev_priv->drm, drm_crtc_index(&crtc->base) != crtc->pipe) > in intel_crtc_init. > AFAIU the idea was to have the WARN_ON to know that we are running a broken driver > (if there any unknown assumption is still left out). Unknown assumptions are by definition unknown. The WARN will not help with those. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
