Hello Jani,
On 11/4/21 20:57, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Nov 2021, Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * drm_drv_enabled - Checks if a DRM driver can be enabled
>> + * @driver: DRM driver to check
>> + *
>> + * Checks whether a DRM driver can be enabled or not. This may be the case
>> + * if the "nomodeset" kernel command line parameter is used.
>> + *
>> + * Return: 0 on success or a negative error code on failure.
>> + */
>> +int drm_drv_enabled(const struct drm_driver *driver)
>> +{
>> + if (vgacon_text_force()) {
>> + DRM_INFO("%s driver is disabled\n", driver->name);
>> + return -ENODEV;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_drv_enabled);
>
> The name implies a bool return, but it's not.
>
> if (drm_drv_enabled(...)) {
> /* surprise, it's disabled! */
> }
>
It used to return a bool in v2 but Thomas suggested an int instead to
have consistency on the errno code that was returned by the callers.
I should probably name that function differently to avoid confusion.
But I think you are correct and this change is caused too much churn
for not that much benefit, specially since is unclear that there might
be another condition to prevent a DRM driver to load besides nomodeset.
I'll just drop this patch and post only #2 but making drivers to test
using the drm_check_modeset() function (which doesn't have a name that
implies a bool return).
>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>
>
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat