On Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 01:27:39PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> Only support NC GPIOs for now, and assume the vlv gpio table only has NC >> GPIOs for now. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <[email protected]> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c >> index c7281c391d0f..a1cc8533cff5 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_panel_vbt.c >> @@ -203,8 +203,8 @@ static void vlv_exec_gpio(struct drm_i915_private >> *dev_priv, >> map = &vlv_gpio_table[gpio_index]; >> >> if (dev_priv->vbt.dsi.seq_version >= 3) { >> - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("GPIO element v3 not supported\n"); >> - return; >> + /* XXX: this assumes vlv_gpio_table only has NC GPIOs. */ >> + port = IOSF_PORT_GPIO_NC; > > NC GPIOs start from index 0, and we accept them up to > ARRAY_SIZE(vlv_gpio_table) > which only holds NC GPIOs as the comment says. Since SC GPIOs would come after > NC GPIOS in index, they would thus have been rejected already by the earlier > check. Makes sense, but I had to actually read the code to see it.
Hey, at least I left you a breadcrumb in the form of that comment there. ;) Pushed 1-2 to drm-intel-next-queued, thanks for the review. BR, Jani. > > Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > >> } else { >> if (gpio_source == 0) { >> port = IOSF_PORT_GPIO_NC; >> -- >> 2.1.4 -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
