On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 09:06:57AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 8:40 AM james qian wang (Arm Technology China) james.qian.wang@arm.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 05:03:33PM +0800, Qinglang Miao wrote:
From: Liu Shixin liushixin2@huawei.com
Use DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE macro to simplify the code.
Signed-off-by: Liu Shixin liushixin2@huawei.com
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c | 13 +------------ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c index 0246b2e94..4a10e6b9e 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c @@ -41,18 +41,7 @@ static int komeda_register_show(struct seq_file *sf, void *x) return 0; }
-static int komeda_register_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) -{
return single_open(filp, komeda_register_show, inode->i_private);-}
-static const struct file_operations komeda_register_fops = {
.owner = THIS_MODULE,.open = komeda_register_open,.read_iter = seq_read_iter,
- .read = seq_read, + .read_iter = seq_read_iter,
.llseek = seq_lseek,.release = single_release,-}; +DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(komeda_register);
Hi Shixin & Qinglang
Thanks for your patch.
Reviewed-by: James Qian Wang james.qian.wang@arm.com
Since your patch is not for drm-misc-next, so seems better to leave it to you to merge it. :)
I do think it's for drm-misc-next, what other tree would it be for? Some people put -next in their patch tag to differentiate from -fixes, so maintainers know what to do with the patch. It's also not part of a series, hence I think this is on you to apply it.
Cheers, Daniel
Hi Daniel:
I tried to apply this patch to drm-misc-next, but failed, and found this patch is actually based on linux-next, and the code base of linux-next is a little different with our drm-misc-next. and one of the difference is linux-next has a patch (call it patch-A):
seq_file: switch over direct seq_read method calls to seq_read_iter https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/7/7/1267
which changed code like below:
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c index 1d767473ba8a06..0246b2e94d8cbd 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ static int komeda_register_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) static const struct file_operations komeda_register_fops = { .owner = THIS_MODULE, .open = komeda_register_open, - .read = seq_read, + .read_iter = seq_read_iter, .llseek = seq_lseek, .release = single_release, };
And these code will be deleted by this patch, if we merge this patch into drm-misc-next firstly before the patch-A, that may import a conflict when we merge our misc into upstreams.
if we want it to be merged into drm-misc, I think we'd better to wait the upstream (the patch-A) has been synced back to drm-misc.
And what's your opinion ?
Thanks James
Thanks James
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS static void komeda_debugfs_init(struct komeda_dev *mdev) -- 2.17.1
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
-- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch