On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:47:09PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > Pass a local acpi_handle around instead of having a static dsm priv > structure. If we need it later, we can always move it to dev_priv, and > the change at hand will make that easier as well. > > Care is taken to preserve old behaviour, particularly using the last > non-NULL acpi handle, whether it makes sense or not. > > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 27 +++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > index d1abf4bb7c81..6ba478e57b9b 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c > @@ -12,10 +12,6 @@ > #define INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID 1 /* For Calpella anyway... */ > #define INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO 1 /* No args */ > > -static struct intel_dsm_priv { > - acpi_handle dhandle; > -} intel_dsm_priv; > - > static const guid_t intel_dsm_guid = > GUID_INIT(0x7ed873d3, 0xc2d0, 0x4e4f, > 0xa8, 0x54, 0x0f, 0x13, 0x17, 0xb0, 0x1c, 0x2c); > @@ -72,12 +68,12 @@ static char *intel_dsm_mux_type(u8 type) > } > } > > -static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) > +static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(acpi_handle dhandle) > { > int i; > union acpi_object *pkg, *connector_count; > > - pkg = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(intel_dsm_priv.dhandle, &intel_dsm_guid, > + pkg = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(dhandle, &intel_dsm_guid, > INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO, > NULL, ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE); > if (!pkg) { > @@ -107,41 +103,40 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void) > ACPI_FREE(pkg); > } > > -static bool intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) > +static acpi_handle intel_dsm_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev) > { > acpi_handle dhandle; > > dhandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); > if (!dhandle) > - return false; > + return NULL; > > if (!acpi_check_dsm(dhandle, &intel_dsm_guid, INTEL_DSM_REVISION_ID, > 1 << INTEL_DSM_FN_PLATFORM_MUX_INFO)) { > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no _DSM method for intel device\n"); > - return false; > + return NULL; > } > > - intel_dsm_priv.dhandle = dhandle; > - intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(); > + intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(dhandle); > > - return true; > + return dhandle; > } > > static bool intel_dsm_detect(void) > { > + acpi_handle dhandle = NULL; > char acpi_method_name[255] = { 0 }; > struct acpi_buffer buffer = {sizeof(acpi_method_name), > acpi_method_name}; > struct pci_dev *pdev = NULL; > - bool has_dsm = false; > int vga_count = 0; > > while ((pdev = pci_get_class(PCI_CLASS_DISPLAY_VGA << 8, pdev)) != > NULL) { > vga_count++; > - has_dsm |= intel_dsm_pci_probe(pdev); > + dhandle = intel_dsm_pci_probe(pdev) ?: dhandle;
I *think* gcc promises not to evaluate things twice with ?:, so should be safe even if intel_dsm_pci_probe() has some side effects. Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > } > > - if (vga_count == 2 && has_dsm) { > - acpi_get_name(intel_dsm_priv.dhandle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, > &buffer); > + if (vga_count == 2 && dhandle) { > + acpi_get_name(dhandle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, &buffer); > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("vga_switcheroo: detected DSM switching method > %s handle\n", > acpi_method_name); > return true; > -- > 2.11.0 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Ville Syrjälä Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
