On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 12:17:28PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 02:10:46PM +0200, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > + if (!check_digital_port_conflicts(dev)) {
>
> Being picky:
>
> if not check digital port for conflicts, report error.
>
> It reads backwards. Perhaps
>
> if (conflicting_digital_port_config(dev)) return -EINVAL;
I just followed the pattern established by check_encoder_cloning(). Should
probably rename both if we go down that path.
>
> > + DRM_DEBUG_KMS("rejecting conflicting digital port configuration\n");
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > + }
>
> Regarding getting more information back to the user about the error
> message, we could with have a connector/crtc property, a procfs file or
> an ioctl to grab a string describing the last error. A LastError
> property blob might be the most convenient. Though I am not sure how
> outlandish this idea is.
Yeah somehow passing a string to userland might be nice for the user. But
I don't think we should start matching such strings in tests, so that
wouldn't help kms_setmode figure out if it just tried something that was
supposed to work or not.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
