Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/dp_mst: Introduce drm_dp_mst_connector_atomic_check()

2018-09-20 Thread Harry Wentland
On 2018-09-18 07:06 PM, Lyude Paul wrote: > Currently the way that we prevent userspace from performing new modesets > on MST connectors that have just been destroyed is rather broken. > There's nothing in the actual DRM DP MST topology helpers that checks > whether or not a connector still

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/dp_mst: Introduce drm_dp_mst_connector_atomic_check()

2018-09-20 Thread Dan Carpenter
Hi Lyude, Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve: url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Lyude-Paul/Fix-legacy-DPMS-changes-with-MST/20180919-203434 base: git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel for-linux-next smatch warnings:

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/dp_mst: Introduce drm_dp_mst_connector_atomic_check() (fwd)

2018-09-19 Thread Lyude Paul
oh, good catch! will fix and respin in just a little bit On Wed, 2018-09-19 at 22:38 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > Hello, > > I don't think you can update the loop index variable in > list_for_each_entry, because the mcro uses th index variable to get to the > next element. Perhaps

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/6] drm/dp_mst: Introduce drm_dp_mst_connector_atomic_check() (fwd)

2018-09-19 Thread Julia Lawall
Hello, I don't think you can update the loop index variable in list_for_each_entry, because the mcro uses th index variable to get to the next element. Perhaps list_for_each_entry_safe would be more suitable? julia -- Forwarded message -- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 04:30:13 +0800