Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 6 Dec 2018 07:53:10 -0500 (EST)
From:   Frediano Ziglio <fziglio@redhat.com>
To:     Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, David Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR QXL VIRTUAL GPU" 
        <spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR QXL VIRTUAL GPU" 
        <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Message-ID: <1902655248.48590444.1544100790071.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181206114217.vog4fgae73us437u@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
References: <20181206103352.20587-1-kraxel@redhat.com> <207905511.48580418.1544093965441.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <20181206114217.vog4fgae73us437u@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
Subject: Re: [Spice-devel] [PATCH] drm/qxl: use qxl_num_crtc directly
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Topic: drm/qxl: use qxl_num_crtc directly
Thread-Index: z2mygEaMZ4w6+s4MjbtqY1/SY+m5aQ==
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 05:59:25AM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > > 
> > > Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using
> > > qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed.  Drops pointless indirection
> > > and also is less confusing.
> > > 
> > 
> > To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with
> > another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors
> > with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of
> > monitors.
> 
> Yes, spice/qxl and drm/kms use slightly different terminology.
> 
> drm crtc == qxl monitor.
> drm framebuffer == qxl surface.
> 
> You need to know that anyway when looking at the qxl ksm code.  We
> have function names like qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config().  I fail
> to see why that is a problem ...
> 
> cheers,
>   Gerd
> 
> 

I don't see any problem too but you are explaining to me
why your rationale "and also is less confusing" does not
stand.

Frediano