Hi Russel On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:58:54PM +0100, David Herrmann wrote: >> Does that -1 ever make sense? We don't support mode-object-hotplugging >> so all "drm_crtc" objects are known at initialization time. I'd rather >> put a BUG() here than a silent -1. This also makes drm_crtc_mask() >> redundant. > > I disagree with that last statement. drm_crtc_mask() is still useful > for converting to the mask, rather than having that open coded all > over the place. It probably makes more sense for drm_crtc_mask() to > become a helper in a header file though. Thierry renamed your helper to drm_crtc_index() and added drm_crtc_mask(). If we remove the -1, drm_crtc_mask() is redundant as it just calls drm_crtc_index(). So I cannot follow what you mean by "open coded all over the place". I guess you were talking about drm_crtc_index()? Thanks David _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
