convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume().
With this conversion, rockchip_drm_fb_resume() and rockchip_drm_fb_suspend() will not be used anymore. Both of these functions can be removed.
Also, in struct rockchip_drm_private state will not be used anymore. So this can be removed forever.
Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ajit Negi ajitn.linux@gmail.com --- drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.c | 46 ++--------------------------- drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.h | 1 - 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.c index f814d37..dd12390 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.c @@ -243,60 +243,18 @@ static void rockchip_drm_unbind(struct device *dev) };
#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP -static void rockchip_drm_fb_suspend(struct drm_device *drm) -{ - struct rockchip_drm_private *priv = drm->dev_private; - - console_lock(); - drm_fb_helper_set_suspend(&priv->fbdev_helper, 1); - console_unlock(); -} - -static void rockchip_drm_fb_resume(struct drm_device *drm) -{ - struct rockchip_drm_private *priv = drm->dev_private; - - console_lock(); - drm_fb_helper_set_suspend(&priv->fbdev_helper, 0); - console_unlock(); -} - static int rockchip_drm_sys_suspend(struct device *dev) { struct drm_device *drm = dev_get_drvdata(dev); - struct rockchip_drm_private *priv; - - if (!drm) - return 0; - - drm_kms_helper_poll_disable(drm); - rockchip_drm_fb_suspend(drm);
- priv = drm->dev_private; - priv->state = drm_atomic_helper_suspend(drm); - if (IS_ERR(priv->state)) { - rockchip_drm_fb_resume(drm); - drm_kms_helper_poll_enable(drm); - return PTR_ERR(priv->state); - } - - return 0; + return drm_mode_config_helper_suspend(drm); }
static int rockchip_drm_sys_resume(struct device *dev) { struct drm_device *drm = dev_get_drvdata(dev); - struct rockchip_drm_private *priv;
- if (!drm) - return 0; - - priv = drm->dev_private; - drm_atomic_helper_resume(drm, priv->state); - rockchip_drm_fb_resume(drm); - drm_kms_helper_poll_enable(drm); - - return 0; + return drm_mode_config_helper_resume(drm); } #endif
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.h index 3a6ebfc..d67ad0a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_drv.h @@ -51,7 +51,6 @@ struct rockchip_crtc_state { struct rockchip_drm_private { struct drm_fb_helper fbdev_helper; struct drm_gem_object *fbdev_bo; - struct drm_atomic_state *state; struct iommu_domain *domain; struct mutex mm_lock; struct drm_mm mm;
Hi Souptick,
Am Dienstag, 31. Juli 2018, 22:34:30 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume().
With this conversion, rockchip_drm_fb_resume() and rockchip_drm_fb_suspend() will not be used anymore. Both of these functions can be removed.
Also, in struct rockchip_drm_private state will not be used anymore. So this can be removed forever.
Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ajit Negi ajitn.linux@gmail.com
the patch itself looks great, just a simple bookkeeping question.
What role did Ajit play in creating the patch? If I remember correctly it is meant to be - 1st Signed-off: Patch-Author - 2nd Signed-off: E-Mail sender + patch possibly patch changes (optional of course if the same)
So was this meant to be a Reviewed-by from Ajit?
Thanks Heiko
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de wrote:
Hi Souptick,
Am Dienstag, 31. Juli 2018, 22:34:30 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume().
With this conversion, rockchip_drm_fb_resume() and rockchip_drm_fb_suspend() will not be used anymore. Both of these functions can be removed.
Also, in struct rockchip_drm_private state will not be used anymore. So this can be removed forever.
Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ajit Negi ajitn.linux@gmail.com
the patch itself looks great, just a simple bookkeeping question.
What role did Ajit play in creating the patch? If I remember correctly it is meant to be
- 1st Signed-off: Patch-Author
- 2nd Signed-off: E-Mail sender + patch possibly patch changes
(optional of course if the same)
So was this meant to be a Reviewed-by from Ajit?
We both are working together for these patches to convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume(). That's the reason to add his name in 2nd Signed-off in all similar patches.
Is it a incorrect way to put 2nd Signed-off here ?
Am Mittwoch, 1. August 2018, 14:43:47 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de wrote:
Hi Souptick,
Am Dienstag, 31. Juli 2018, 22:34:30 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume().
With this conversion, rockchip_drm_fb_resume() and rockchip_drm_fb_suspend() will not be used anymore. Both of these functions can be removed.
Also, in struct rockchip_drm_private state will not be used anymore. So this can be removed forever.
Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ajit Negi ajitn.linux@gmail.com
the patch itself looks great, just a simple bookkeeping question.
What role did Ajit play in creating the patch? If I remember correctly it is meant to be
- 1st Signed-off: Patch-Author
- 2nd Signed-off: E-Mail sender + patch possibly patch changes
(optional of course if the same)
So was this meant to be a Reviewed-by from Ajit?
We both are working together for these patches to convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume(). That's the reason to add his name in 2nd Signed-off in all similar patches.
Is it a incorrect way to put 2nd Signed-off here ?
Thanks for the clarification and the interesting question :-)
I've just read through Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst and it seems there is an "official" way to show that relationship, via a tag named "Co-Developed-by:" described under number 12.
So I guess we could just adapt the patch accordingly, if that is ok with both of you (i.e. I can change this when applying, so no need to resend).
Heiko
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 1. August 2018, 14:43:47 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de wrote:
Hi Souptick,
Am Dienstag, 31. Juli 2018, 22:34:30 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume().
With this conversion, rockchip_drm_fb_resume() and rockchip_drm_fb_suspend() will not be used anymore. Both of these functions can be removed.
Also, in struct rockchip_drm_private state will not be used anymore. So this can be removed forever.
Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ajit Negi ajitn.linux@gmail.com
the patch itself looks great, just a simple bookkeeping question.
What role did Ajit play in creating the patch? If I remember correctly it is meant to be
- 1st Signed-off: Patch-Author
- 2nd Signed-off: E-Mail sender + patch possibly patch changes
(optional of course if the same)
So was this meant to be a Reviewed-by from Ajit?
We both are working together for these patches to convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume(). That's the reason to add his name in 2nd Signed-off in all similar patches.
Is it a incorrect way to put 2nd Signed-off here ?
Thanks for the clarification and the interesting question :-)
I've just read through Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst and it seems there is an "official" way to show that relationship, via a tag named "Co-Developed-by:" described under number 12.
So I guess we could just adapt the patch accordingly, if that is ok with both of you (i.e. I can change this when applying, so no need to resend).
We are ok with it :-)
Heiko
Am Mittwoch, 1. August 2018, 15:14:24 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 1. August 2018, 14:43:47 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:03 PM, Heiko Stuebner heiko@sntech.de wrote:
Hi Souptick,
Am Dienstag, 31. Juli 2018, 22:34:30 CEST schrieb Souptick Joarder:
convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume() to use drm_mode_config_helper_suspend/resume().
With this conversion, rockchip_drm_fb_resume() and rockchip_drm_fb_suspend() will not be used anymore. Both of these functions can be removed.
Also, in struct rockchip_drm_private state will not be used anymore. So this can be removed forever.
Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder jrdr.linux@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Ajit Negi ajitn.linux@gmail.com
the patch itself looks great, just a simple bookkeeping question.
What role did Ajit play in creating the patch? If I remember correctly it is meant to be
- 1st Signed-off: Patch-Author
- 2nd Signed-off: E-Mail sender + patch possibly patch changes
(optional of course if the same)
So was this meant to be a Reviewed-by from Ajit?
We both are working together for these patches to convert drm_atomic_helper_suspend/resume(). That's the reason to add his name in 2nd Signed-off in all similar patches.
Is it a incorrect way to put 2nd Signed-off here ?
Thanks for the clarification and the interesting question :-)
I've just read through Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst and it seems there is an "official" way to show that relationship, via a tag named "Co-Developed-by:" described under number 12.
So I guess we could just adapt the patch accordingly, if that is ok with both of you (i.e. I can change this when applying, so no need to resend).
We are ok with it :-)
applied to drm-misc-next with the second signed-off changed to co-developed-by.
Thanks for that nice cleanup. Heiko
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-
Heiko Stuebner -
Souptick Joarder