On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 05:44:36PM +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Rewrite intel_crtc_copy_uapi_to_hw_state_nomodeset() in a
> slightly more straightforward manner.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c | 17 +++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> index a5450ac9e2d0..5716085e15f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c
> @@ -7347,18 +7347,15 @@ static void
> intel_crtc_copy_uapi_to_hw_state_nomodeset(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state)
> {
> - const struct intel_crtc_state *from_crtc_state = crtc_state;
> + const struct intel_crtc_state *master_crtc_state;
Are we changing the naming convention to primary/secondary crtc? In that case should we name this as primary_crtc_state ?
If thats oing to be handled in a separate series, this logic looks good
Reviewed-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@xxxxxxxxx>
Manasi
> + struct intel_crtc *master_crtc;
>
> - if (crtc_state->bigjoiner_slave) {
> - from_crtc_state = intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state,
> - crtc_state->bigjoiner_linked_crtc);
> + master_crtc = intel_master_crtc(crtc_state);
> + master_crtc_state = intel_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state, master_crtc);
>
> - /* No need to copy state if the master state is unchanged */
> - if (!from_crtc_state)
> - return;
> - }
> -
> - intel_crtc_copy_color_blobs(crtc_state, from_crtc_state);
> + /* No need to copy state if the master state is unchanged */
> + if (master_crtc_state)
> + intel_crtc_copy_color_blobs(crtc_state, master_crtc_state);
> }
>
> static void
> --
> 2.32.0
>
