Hi Hans,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 9:46 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7/8/22 20:21, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Extract the code to check for a named mode parameter into its own
function, to streamline the main parsing flow.
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modes.c
@@ -1749,6 +1749,30 @@ static const char * const drm_named_modes_whitelist[] = {
"PAL",
};
+static int drm_mode_parse_cmdline_named_mode(const char *name,
+ unsigned int length,
+ bool refresh,
+ struct drm_cmdline_mode *mode)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int ret;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(drm_named_modes_whitelist); i++) {
+ ret = str_has_prefix(name, drm_named_modes_whitelist[i]);
+ if (!ret)
As discussed in my review of 1/5 this needs to become:
if (ret != length)
+ continue;
Agreed.
Which renders my other comment on this patch (length not being used) mute.
/me wonders if he would have seen the light earlier if gcc would have
warned about that...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
