From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/tegra: Fix possible CRTC mask for RGB outputs Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:45:58 +0100 Message-ID: <20140114134557.GD10936@ulmo.nvidia.com> References: <1389622894-9574-1-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <1389622894-9574-2-git-send-email-treding@nvidia.com> <52D425FA.10402@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rz+pwK2yUstbofK6" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52D425FA.10402-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: David Airlie , dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --rz+pwK2yUstbofK6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:44:26AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 01/13/2014 07:21 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > > The mask of possible CRTCs that an output (DRM encoder) can be attached > > to is relative to the position within the DRM device's list of CRTCs. > > Deferred probing can cause this to not match the pipe number associated > > with a CRTC. Use the newly introduced drm_crtc_mask() to compute the > > mask by looking up the proper index of the given CRTC in the list. >=20 > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/rgb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/rgb.c >=20 > > @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ int tegra_dc_rgb_init(struct drm_device *drm, struc= t tegra_dc *dc) >=20 > > - rgb->output.encoder.possible_crtcs =3D 1 << dc->pipe; > > + rgb->output.encoder.possible_crtcs =3D drm_crtc_mask(&dc->base); >=20 > For me, on top of either next-20140109 or next-20140113, this causes: >=20 > > drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/rgb.c: In function =E2=80=98tegra_dc_rgb_init=E2= =80=99: > > drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/rgb.c:261:2: error: implicit declaration of funct= ion =E2=80=98drm_crtc_mask=E2=80=99 [-Werror=3Dimplicit-function-declaratio= n] It depends on a separate patch that I sent earlier yesterday. I thought I had Cc'ed you and the linux-tegra mailing list on that patch, but I'm misremembering apparently. Here's a link to the patch: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/3475421/ Thierry --rz+pwK2yUstbofK6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJS1T+VAAoJEN0jrNd/PrOhj5oP/1VBMw7dtqtaznKhFQ7TQ24c W8rRvX6jno1/XTVnXBekMmygV2fQGN5UXOhg5+naAs6KuRU+UAxEirHmkpMTpHaK CHxwGaGVnqeZMDGKocGeiMfmRtQzhlLwtkTxKvJPF1yHFBNNaYCZVvs/znUuQnRD TSA8/uwbJHbe3SGBGqQFQ84GWnsmjvsae0Y9rNrIarTFW/AR0m9Iudf+XpJm0o14 s2MNqj6S0lk1BexSdkgUZ+xFu9BrjIPYSdQkxFP76mctLXsQAR91OCSYqUT2Yg28 fOjf+SnUNhL1t7B/DoanIfnvPWaLjIO203FHbP602wtnRUS20qa0Nq/dtGyjQRDS wOTsdxWO4blvaL57FHNTslodVvaujGnUvxM0BUhX/5pXW9kUbnGpNHtBtr7YT+re 8tluUDV20lVb/zU664O0rUZ5PH1jiW4KtxoIsOHLxhpyxaRCObC6E888mpRlcLEm ydaor5W0oOBmNnshN3V2I0IbDLn6NklOzp4acjxyAjmAID0qPnctl156dfvRBbjS OslOvZ+YPmZjmbZqcD4k5iUyKDmYCAAjl5lIXBxE2rAY2I6DV4j74uyihbF+9j95 uWIzG3Am3/OQzO99Es11dkau+hYR4JJfX8EtWpM/xLdWswoBLJlOVFLiuTkdbjd8 jWBBv6IZReNVYSJVt9Ed =r1br -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rz+pwK2yUstbofK6--