Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <ef2ba536-a7ea-7cfb-7cf6-9e0c02aeba80@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2023 09:28:25 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/vblank: Simplify drm_dev_has_vblank()
Content-Language: en-US
To:     =?UTF-8?B?VmlsbGUgU3lyasOkbMOk?= <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230403160735.1211468-1-robdclark@gmail.com>
 <ZCr9jrhTyGuZA+Qt@intel.com>
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZCr9jrhTyGuZA+Qt@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 4/3/23 09:23, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:07:35AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
>> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>
>>
>> What does vblank have to do with num_crtcs?  Well, this was technically
>> correct, but you'd have to go look at where num_crtcs is initialized to
>> understand why.  Lets just replace it with the simpler and more obvious
>> check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
>> index 877e2067534f..ad34c235d853 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
>> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_vblank_init);
>>   */
>>  bool drm_dev_has_vblank(const struct drm_device *dev)
>>  {
>> -	return dev->num_crtcs != 0;
>> +	return !!dev->vblank;
> 
> The compiler knows how to turn things into a boolean.
>> Or I guess if we want to be a bit more explicit we could
> write this as
>  return dev->vblank != NULL;
> but IIRC that will make checkpatch complain because of
> someone's personal taste.

checkpatch isn't an absolute thing. :)

-- 
~Randy