On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 11:27:18AM -0800, Abhinav Kumar wrote: > > > On 2/20/2024 11:20 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 21:05, Dmitry Baryshkov > > <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 20:53, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 2/20/2024 10:49 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 21:08, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> intel_dp_vsc_sdp_pack() can be re-used by other DRM drivers as well. > >>>>> Lets move this to drm_dp_helper to achieve this. > >>>>> > >>>>> changes in v2: > >>>>> - rebased on top of drm-tip > >>>>> > >>>>> Acked-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>> v1 had an explicit comment before the ack: > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yes, I remember the comment. I did not make any changes to v2 other than > >>> just rebasing it on drm-tip to get the ack from i915 folks. > >>> > >>>>> From my side, with the promise of the size fixup. > >>>> > >>>> However I observe neither a second patch removing the size argument > >>>> nor it being dropped as a part of this patch. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yes, now that in v2 we got the ack for this patch, I can spin a v3 with > >>> the addition of the next patch to remove the size OR as another series > >>> so as to not block the main series which needs this patch. > >>> > >>> I would prefer the latter. > >> > >> It doesn't work this way. The comment should have been fixed for v2. > > > > This probably deserves some explanation. Currently there is only one > > user of this function. So it is easy to fix it. Once there are several > > users, you have to fix all of them at the same time, patching > > different drm subtrees. That complicates the life of maintainers. > > > > Yes, understood. Its easier to fix it now if its really needed. > > Actually, I think the reason the size was passed was to make sure > a valid struct dp_sdp *sdp was being passed. The size is supposed to be the size of *hardware* buffer where this gets written into. But looks like this wasn't done correctly when the code was copy-pasted from the HDMI inforframe code. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel
