* [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again
@ 2012-05-02 9:06 Daniel Vetter
2012-05-02 15:44 ` Ben Widawsky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2012-05-02 9:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Intel Graphics Development; +Cc: Daniel Vetter
Unfortunately it looks like further vlv patches are still stalled due
to fried hw, and too many people are a bit annoyed about the unused
function warning.
So let's just rip it out, we can easily put it back in again.
Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 22 ----------------------
1 file changed, 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
index e1716be..045f545 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
@@ -384,28 +384,6 @@ out_unlock:
return val;
}
-static void intel_dpio_write(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int reg,
- u32 val)
-{
- unsigned long flags;
-
- spin_lock_irqsave(&dev_priv->dpio_lock, flags);
- if (wait_for_atomic_us((I915_READ(DPIO_PKT) & DPIO_BUSY) == 0, 100)) {
- DRM_ERROR("DPIO idle wait timed out\n");
- goto out_unlock;
- }
-
- I915_WRITE(DPIO_DATA, val);
- I915_WRITE(DPIO_REG, reg);
- I915_WRITE(DPIO_PKT, DPIO_RID | DPIO_OP_WRITE | DPIO_PORTID |
- DPIO_BYTE);
- if (wait_for_atomic_us((I915_READ(DPIO_PKT) & DPIO_BUSY) == 0, 100))
- DRM_ERROR("DPIO write wait timed out\n");
-
-out_unlock:
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->dpio_lock, flags);
-}
-
static void vlv_init_dpio(struct drm_device *dev)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
--
1.7.10
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again
2012-05-02 9:06 [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again Daniel Vetter
@ 2012-05-02 15:44 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-05-02 18:55 ` Jesse Barnes
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Widawsky @ 2012-05-02 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: Intel Graphics Development
On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:06:23 +0200
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> Unfortunately it looks like further vlv patches are still stalled due
> to fried hw, and too many people are a bit annoyed about the unused
> function warning.
It is my preference that you never merge code which you know will
produce a warning. I still stand by adding a __used for intermediate
patches.
>
> So let's just rip it out, we can easily put it back in again.
>
> Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 22 ----------------------
> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> index e1716be..045f545 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> @@ -384,28 +384,6 @@ out_unlock:
> return val;
> }
>
> -static void intel_dpio_write(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, int reg,
> - u32 val)
> -{
> - unsigned long flags;
> -
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&dev_priv->dpio_lock, flags);
> - if (wait_for_atomic_us((I915_READ(DPIO_PKT) & DPIO_BUSY) == 0, 100)) {
> - DRM_ERROR("DPIO idle wait timed out\n");
> - goto out_unlock;
> - }
> -
> - I915_WRITE(DPIO_DATA, val);
> - I915_WRITE(DPIO_REG, reg);
> - I915_WRITE(DPIO_PKT, DPIO_RID | DPIO_OP_WRITE | DPIO_PORTID |
> - DPIO_BYTE);
> - if (wait_for_atomic_us((I915_READ(DPIO_PKT) & DPIO_BUSY) == 0, 100))
> - DRM_ERROR("DPIO write wait timed out\n");
> -
> -out_unlock:
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->dpio_lock, flags);
> -}
> -
> static void vlv_init_dpio(struct drm_device *dev)
> {
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again
2012-05-02 15:44 ` Ben Widawsky
@ 2012-05-02 18:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2012-05-02 20:18 ` Ben Widawsky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jesse Barnes @ 2012-05-02 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Widawsky; +Cc: Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development
On Wed, 2 May 2012 08:44:27 -0700
Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:06:23 +0200
> Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately it looks like further vlv patches are still stalled due
> > to fried hw, and too many people are a bit annoyed about the unused
> > function warning.
>
> It is my preference that you never merge code which you know will
> produce a warning. I still stand by adding a __used for intermediate
> patches.
Well he could have just merged the other patches too, but nooo...
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again
2012-05-02 18:55 ` Jesse Barnes
@ 2012-05-02 20:18 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-05-03 0:22 ` Jesse Barnes
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ben Widawsky @ 2012-05-02 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jesse Barnes; +Cc: Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development
On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:55:48 -0700
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2012 08:44:27 -0700
> Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:06:23 +0200
> > Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > Unfortunately it looks like further vlv patches are still stalled due
> > > to fried hw, and too many people are a bit annoyed about the unused
> > > function warning.
> >
> > It is my preference that you never merge code which you know will
> > produce a warning. I still stand by adding a __used for intermediate
> > patches.
>
> Well he could have just merged the other patches too, but nooo...
>
Twasn't a shot at you... shot was fired at Daniel (although if you *did*
but in __used I wouldn't have had to shoot at Daniel).
--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again
2012-05-02 20:18 ` Ben Widawsky
@ 2012-05-03 0:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2012-05-03 9:10 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jesse Barnes @ 2012-05-03 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Widawsky; +Cc: Daniel Vetter, Intel Graphics Development
On Wed, 2 May 2012 13:18:56 -0700
Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:55:48 -0700
> Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2 May 2012 08:44:27 -0700
> > Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:06:23 +0200
> > > Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Unfortunately it looks like further vlv patches are still stalled due
> > > > to fried hw, and too many people are a bit annoyed about the unused
> > > > function warning.
> > >
> > > It is my preference that you never merge code which you know will
> > > produce a warning. I still stand by adding a __used for intermediate
> > > patches.
> >
> > Well he could have just merged the other patches too, but nooo...
> >
>
> Twasn't a shot at you... shot was fired at Daniel (although if you *did*
> but in __used I wouldn't have had to shoot at Daniel).
Meh ok you can kill this function. Vijay will be re-posting the code
that uses it (and adds it again) once he gets his hardware, unless I
beat him to it (still waiting on a new CPU).
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again
2012-05-03 0:22 ` Jesse Barnes
@ 2012-05-03 9:10 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2012-05-03 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jesse Barnes; +Cc: Daniel Vetter, Ben Widawsky, Intel Graphics Development
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 05:22:19PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2012 13:18:56 -0700
> Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:55:48 -0700
> > Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2 May 2012 08:44:27 -0700
> > > Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 2 May 2012 11:06:23 +0200
> > > > Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately it looks like further vlv patches are still stalled due
> > > > > to fried hw, and too many people are a bit annoyed about the unused
> > > > > function warning.
> > > >
> > > > It is my preference that you never merge code which you know will
> > > > produce a warning. I still stand by adding a __used for intermediate
> > > > patches.
> > >
> > > Well he could have just merged the other patches too, but nooo...
> > >
> >
> > Twasn't a shot at you... shot was fired at Daniel (although if you *did*
> > but in __used I wouldn't have had to shoot at Daniel).
>
> Meh ok you can kill this function. Vijay will be re-posting the code
> that uses it (and adds it again) once he gets his hardware, unless I
> beat him to it (still waiting on a new CPU).
I guess that counts as an ack ... patch merged for -next.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-05-03 9:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-05-02 9:06 [PATCH] drm/i915: rip out intel_dpio_write again Daniel Vetter
2012-05-02 15:44 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-05-02 18:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2012-05-02 20:18 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-05-03 0:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2012-05-03 9:10 ` Daniel Vetter
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox