Remove the function intel_output_name() that is not used anywhere.
This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 22 ----------------------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 1 -
2 files changed, 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
index f0a1a56..14c47cf 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
@@ -12258,28 +12258,6 @@ static bool has_edp_a(struct drm_device *dev)
return true;
}
-const char *intel_output_name(int output)
-{
- static const char *names[] = {
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_UNUSED] = "Unused",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_ANALOG] = "Analog",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_DVO] = "DVO",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_SDVO] = "SDVO",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_LVDS] = "LVDS",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_TVOUT] = "TV",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_HDMI] = "HDMI",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_DISPLAYPORT] = "DisplayPort",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_EDP] = "eDP",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_DSI] = "DSI",
- [INTEL_OUTPUT_UNKNOWN] = "Unknown",
- };
-
- if (output < 0 || output >= ARRAY_SIZE(names) || !names[output])
- return "Invalid";
-
- return names[output];
-}
-
static bool intel_crt_present(struct drm_device *dev)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
index ba71522..7dde496 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
@@ -793,7 +793,6 @@ void intel_ddi_clock_get(struct intel_encoder *encoder,
void intel_ddi_set_vc_payload_alloc(struct drm_crtc *crtc, bool state);
/* intel_display.c */
-const char *intel_output_name(int output);
bool intel_has_pending_fb_unpin(struct drm_device *dev);
int intel_pch_rawclk(struct drm_device *dev);
void intel_mark_busy(struct drm_device *dev);
--
1.7.10.4
On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 07:29:17PM +0100, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> Remove the function intel_output_name() that is not used anywhere.
>
> This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <[email protected]>
Queued for 3.20, thanks for the patch.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
2014-12-08 6:42 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>:
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 07:29:17PM +0100, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
>> Remove the function intel_output_name() that is not used anywhere.
>>
>> This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <[email protected]>
>
> Queued for 3.20, thanks for the patch.
This function was created for the "DDI personality" patches. We merged
the function but never ended up merging the patch containing the
callers...
> -Daniel
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Paulo Zanoni
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:32:49AM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> 2014-12-08 6:42 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>:
> > On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 07:29:17PM +0100, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> >> Remove the function intel_output_name() that is not used anywhere.
> >>
> >> This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <[email protected]>
> >
> > Queued for 3.20, thanks for the patch.
>
> This function was created for the "DDI personality" patches. We merged
> the function but never ended up merging the patch containing the
> callers...
Oops, I've thought this is a renmant from the very first days of kms that
somehow stuck around. That's what I get for once not using git blame
excessively :( Want me to drop the patch again?
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
2014-12-08 12:17 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:32:49AM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
>> 2014-12-08 6:42 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>:
>> > On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 07:29:17PM +0100, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
>> >> Remove the function intel_output_name() that is not used anywhere.
>> >>
>> >> This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <[email protected]>
>> >
>> > Queued for 3.20, thanks for the patch.
>>
>> This function was created for the "DDI personality" patches. We merged
>> the function but never ended up merging the patch containing the
>> callers...
>
> Oops, I've thought this is a renmant from the very first days of kms that
> somehow stuck around. That's what I get for once not using git blame
> excessively :( Want me to drop the patch again?
I am not opposed to the removal of an unused function: I understand
the value in the removal, and I also understand the reasons to keep
it. I was just pointing the reason of why we got here: we merged patch
1/2 but ended up never merging patch 2/2 because we always spot some
additional work required and it's a very low priority bug. If this
function is removed, the next person to try to ressurrect the ddi
personality patch can quickly resurrect it or even write a new
implementation from scratch. It is your decision :)
> -Daniel
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
Paulo Zanoni