Re: [PATCH v1 30/30] drm/i915/dp: return -EINVAL on failure

["Michał Grzelak" <michal.grzelak@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1798 bytes --]

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026, Imre Deak wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 12:46:19AM +0200, Michał Grzelak wrote:
>> Both intel_dp_rate_index() and intel_dp_link_config_index() in case of
>> failure return -1 which equates to -EPERM. Return -EINVAL instead since
>> each caller checks for negative error code.
>>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Michał Grzelak <michal.grzelak@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c           | 2 +-
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_link_caps.c | 2 +-
>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>> index 66346b74b2c04..1c0b85ac27ad5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c
>> @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ int intel_dp_rate_index(const int *rates, int len, int rate)
>>  		if (rate == rates[i])
>>  			return i;
>>
>> -	return -1;
>> +	return -EINVAL;
>
> I'm not sure about these changes. Both of these functions can fail in
> one way and returning an invalid index in that case looks ok to me.

Agreed, please drop this patch then. Also, thank you for taking the
previous one.

BR,
Michał

>
>>  }
>>
>>  static void intel_dp_get_common_rates(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_link_caps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_link_caps.c
>> index 1c34ba6c49c35..241809e6a9cb2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_link_caps.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_link_caps.c
>> @@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ int intel_dp_link_config_index(struct intel_dp_link_caps *link_caps,
>>  			return i;
>>  	}
>>
>> -	return -1;
>> +	return -EINVAL;
>>  }
>>
>>  /**
>> --
>> 2.45.2
>>
>