We only need to check for this in psr_enable, everything else is already protect by the dev_priv->psr.enabled checks. Those need the psr locking, but these functions are called infrequent enough that the locking overhead is negligible.
Suggested by Chris Wilson. Cc: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c | 14 -------------- 1 file changed, 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c index 1a8b3d90e422..0c1c77ae16fb 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c @@ -1754,11 +1754,6 @@ static bool intel_edp_psr_match_conditions(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) dev_priv->psr.source_ok = false; - if (!HAS_PSR(dev)) { - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("PSR not supported on this platform\n"); - return false; - } - if (IS_HASWELL(dev) && dig_port->port != PORT_A) { DRM_DEBUG_KMS("HSW ties PSR to DDI A (eDP)\n"); return false; @@ -1845,9 +1840,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_disable(struct intel_dp *intel_dp) struct drm_device *dev = intel_dp_to_dev(intel_dp); struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; - if (!HAS_PSR(dev)) - return; - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock); if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) { mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock); @@ -1922,9 +1914,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_invalidate(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_crtc *crtc; enum pipe pipe; - if (!HAS_PSR(dev)) - return; - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock); if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) { mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock); @@ -1949,9 +1938,6 @@ void intel_edp_psr_flush(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_crtc *crtc; enum pipe pipe; - if (!HAS_PSR(dev)) - return; - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->psr.lock); if (!dev_priv->psr.enabled) { mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->psr.lock); -- 2.0.0 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
