Hi, > On 13 Dec 2016, at 6:48 pm, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at > linux.intel.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 06:19:12PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: >> @@ -357,7 +357,10 @@ int drm_mode_getcrtc(struct drm_device *dev, >> >> drm_modeset_lock_crtc(crtc, crtc->primary); >> crtc_resp->gamma_size = crtc->gamma_size; >> - if (crtc->primary->fb) >> + >> + if (crtc->primary->state && crtc->primary->state->fb) >> + crtc_resp->fb_id = crtc->primary->state->fb->base.id; >> + else if (!crtc->primary->state && crtc->primary->fb) >> crtc_resp->fb_id = crtc->primary->fb->base.id; > > I think what we do elsewhere is totally ignore the legacy junk if the > ->state pointer exists.
Indeed, hence the negative state check on the second branch; having nested if statements instead seemed unnecessarily unwieldy, but the effect is the same. [Obligatory mobile formatting apology.] Cheers, Daniel
