Hi!

Thanks for reviewing those patches

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 03:50:41PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 01:32:21PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > The current atomic helpers have either their object state being passed as
> > an argument or the full atomic state.
> > 
> > The former is the pattern that was done at first, before switching to the
> > latter for new hooks or when it was needed.
> > 
> > Let's start convert all the remaining helpers to provide a consistent
> > interface, starting with the CRTC's atomic_check.
> > 
> > The conversion was done using the coccinelle script below,
> > built tested on all the drivers and actually tested on vc4.
> > 
> > virtual report
> 
> ?
> 
> <snip>
> > @ depends on crtc_atomic_func @
> > identifier crtc_atomic_func.func;
> > expression E;
> > type T;
> > @@
> > 
> >  int func(...)
> >  {
> > 	...
> > -	T state = E;
> > +	T crtc_state = E;
> >  	<+...
> > -	state
> > +	crtc_state
> >  	...+>
> 
> >  }
> > 
> > @ depends on crtc_atomic_func @
> > identifier crtc_atomic_func.func;
> > type T;
> > @@
> > 
> >  int func(...)
> >  {
> >  	...
> > -	T state;
> > +	T crtc_state;
> >  	<+...
> > -	state
> > +	crtc_state
> >  	...+>
> >  }
> 
> These two seem a bit fuzzy. AFAICS 'state' could be any
> kind of state given the constrainsts. Though I guess
> the fact that this is the crtc .atomic_check() it's most
> likely to either the crtc state or the whole atomic state.
> 
> Not sure what would be the best way to tighten this up.
> Maybe a regex thing on the assignment? But I'm not sure
> you can even do that on an expression.

That would be a bit above my current coccinelle skills :)

I guess we could replace T by struct drm_crtc_state, that would catch
most cases like you pointed out, even though it's still not completely
accurate.

> Anyways, doesn't look like this went wrong anywhere, so
> seems good enough for a onetime job.
> 
> <snip>
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mxsfb/mxsfb_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/mxsfb/mxsfb_kms.c
> > index 956f631997f2..b0757f84a979 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mxsfb/mxsfb_kms.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mxsfb/mxsfb_kms.c
> > @@ -269,17 +269,19 @@ static void mxsfb_crtc_mode_set_nofb(struct mxsfb_drm_private *mxsfb)
> >  }
> >  
> >  static int mxsfb_crtc_atomic_check(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
> > -				   struct drm_crtc_state *state)
> > +				   struct drm_atomic_state *state)
> >  {
> > -	bool has_primary = state->plane_mask &
> > +	struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state = drm_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state,
> > +									  crtc);
> > +	bool has_primary = crtc_state->plane_mask &
> >  			   drm_plane_mask(crtc->primary);
> >  
> >  	/* The primary plane has to be enabled when the CRTC is active. */
> > -	if (state->active && !has_primary)
> > +	if (crtc_state->active && !has_primary)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> >  	/* TODO: Is this needed ? */
> > -	return drm_atomic_add_affected_planes(state->state, crtc);
> > +	return drm_atomic_add_affected_planes(crtc_state->state, crtc);
> 
> Could also s/crtc_state->state/state/ in various places.
>
> But that could done as a followup as well.

I'll send a subsequent patch for that one

> Didn't spot any mistakes:
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

Thanks!
Maxime