We only need to check for this in psr_enable, everything else is
already protect by the dev_priv->psr.enabled checks. Those need the
psr locking, but these functions are called infrequent enough that the
locking overhead is negligible.
Suggested by Chris Wilson.
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 14 --------------
1 file changed, 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
index 1a8b3d90e422..0c1c77ae16fb 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
@@ -1754,11 +1754,6 @@ static bool intel_edp_psr_match_conditions(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
dev_priv->psr.source_ok = false;
- if (!HAS_PSR(dev)) {
- DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR not supported on this platform\n");
- return false;
- }
-
if (IS_HASWELL(dev) && dig_port->port != PORT_A) {
DRM_DEBUG_KMS("HSW ties PSR to DDI A (eDP)\n");
return false;
@@ -1845,9 +1840,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_disable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp);
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
- if (!HAS_PSR(dev))
- return;
-
mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
@@ -1922,9 +1914,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_invalidate(struct drm_device *dev,
struct drm_crtc *crtc;
enum pipe pipe;
- if (!HAS_PSR(dev))
- return;
-
mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
@@ -1949,9 +1938,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_flush(struct drm_device *dev,
struct drm_crtc *crtc;
enum pipe pipe;
- if (!HAS_PSR(dev))
- return;
-
mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) {
mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock);
--
2.0.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
