Re: [PATCH] drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()

[Daniel Vetter]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 08:08:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Daniel Vetter  wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 03:05:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Vetter  wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> >> In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list 
> >> >> pointer to
> >> >> all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and 
> >> >> from_timer()
> >> >> to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
> >> >>
> >> >> Cc: Patrik Jakobsson 
> >> >> Cc: David Airlie 
> >> >> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook 
> >> >
> >> > Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger 
> >> > refactoring?
> >>
> >> If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want
> >> to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that
> >> too.
> >
> > Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15
> > already).
> 
> Since this is one of the few remaining "non-trivial" users of the
> ancient init_timer() API, would you mind if the timers tree carried
> this for 4.15? I'm trying to entirely remove the init_timer() API (and
> if I can, remove the old setup_*timer() API too).

I was contemplating before applying it whether I should ask ...

Oh well, problem is that drm-misc is non-rebasing, but you can just apply
it twice. git usually figures it out.

Acked-by: Daniel Vetter 

in case you do so.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()

[Kees Cook]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Daniel Vetter  wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 03:05:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Vetter  wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> >> In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer 
>> >> to
>> >> all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and 
>> >> from_timer()
>> >> to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
>> >>
>> >> Cc: Patrik Jakobsson 
>> >> Cc: David Airlie 
>> >> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
>> >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook 
>> >
>> > Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger 
>> > refactoring?
>>
>> If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want
>> to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that
>> too.
>
> Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15
> already).

Since this is one of the few remaining "non-trivial" users of the
ancient init_timer() API, would you mind if the timers tree carried
this for 4.15? I'm trying to entirely remove the init_timer() API (and
if I can, remove the old setup_*timer() API too).

Thanks!

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 03:05:29PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Vetter  wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to
> >> all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer()
> >> to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
> >>
> >> Cc: Patrik Jakobsson 
> >> Cc: David Airlie 
> >> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook 
> >
> > Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger 
> > refactoring?
> 
> If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want
> to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that
> too.

Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15
already).

Thanks, Daniel

> 
> > A notch more context in the commit message would help ...
> 
> Sorry about that, my added context for this go lost in later conversion 
> patches.
> 
> -Kees
> 
> -- 
> Kees Cook
> Pixel Security
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()

[Kees Cook]

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Vetter  wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to
>> all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer()
>> to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
>>
>> Cc: Patrik Jakobsson 
>> Cc: David Airlie 
>> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook 
>
> Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger 
> refactoring?

If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want
to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that
too.

> A notch more context in the commit message would help ...

Sorry about that, my added context for this go lost in later conversion patches.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH] drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()

[Daniel Vetter]

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to
> all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer()
> to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
> 
> Cc: Patrik Jakobsson 
> Cc: David Airlie 
> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook 

Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger refactoring?

A notch more context in the commit message would help ...
-Daniel

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c | 8 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c
> index 1d2ebb5e530f..be6dda58fcae 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c
> @@ -23,9 +23,9 @@
>  #include "psb_intel_reg.h"
>  #include 
>  
> -static void psb_lid_timer_func(unsigned long data)
> +static void psb_lid_timer_func(struct timer_list *t)
>  {
> - struct drm_psb_private * dev_priv = (struct drm_psb_private *)data;
> + struct drm_psb_private *dev_priv = from_timer(dev_priv, t, lid_timer);
>   struct drm_device *dev = (struct drm_device *)dev_priv->dev;
>   struct timer_list *lid_timer = _priv->lid_timer;
>   unsigned long irq_flags;
> @@ -77,10 +77,8 @@ void psb_lid_timer_init(struct drm_psb_private *dev_priv)
>   spin_lock_init(_priv->lid_lock);
>   spin_lock_irqsave(_priv->lid_lock, irq_flags);
>  
> - init_timer(lid_timer);
> + timer_setup(lid_timer, psb_lid_timer_func, 0);
>  
> - lid_timer->data = (unsigned long)dev_priv;
> - lid_timer->function = psb_lid_timer_func;
>   lid_timer->expires = jiffies + PSB_LID_DELAY;
>  
>   add_timer(lid_timer);
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kees Cook
> Pixel Security
> ___
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel