Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Remove redundant check for negative timeout while doing an atomic pipe update

["Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>]

On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 04:33:00PM -0700, Tarun Vyas wrote:
> From: Tarun <tarun.vyas@intel.com>
> 
> No functional changes, just a minor knit. Stumbled across the kernel doc for
> schedule_timeout() which quotes "In all cases the return value is guaranteed
> to be non-negative". Also, the return code of schedule_timeout() already checks
> for negative values "return timeout < 0 ? 0 : timeout;" and returns 0
> in such cases. Furthermore, the msec_to_jiffies returns an ungined long
> value. So, let's do away with the redundant check for an atomic
> pipe update.
> 
> v2: Commit message changes (Manasi).
> 
> Reviewed-by: Manasi Navare <manasi.d.navare@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tarun Vyas <tarun.vyas@intel.com>

Pushed to dinq. Thanks for the patch and review.

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> index aa1dfaa692b9..9cd4be020840 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c
> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ void intel_pipe_update_start(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>  		if (scanline < min || scanline > max)
>  			break;
>  
> -		if (timeout <= 0) {
> +		if (!timeout) {
>  			DRM_ERROR("Potential atomic update failure on pipe %c\n",
>  				  pipe_name(crtc->pipe));
>  			break;
> -- 
> 2.13.5
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx