Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] drm: Use state helper instead of plane state pointer in atomic_check

From: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
To: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>, Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Tomi Valkeinen <tomba@kernel.org>, Jyri Sarha <jyri.sarha@iki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] drm: Use state helper instead of plane state pointer in atomic_check
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 15:41:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210223144117.6lhuizr2zrutbkzi@gilmour> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e6e8191d-08d9-7144-bb1a-ddaa6c21eccb@suse.de>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2677 bytes --]

Hi Thomas,

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:12:49AM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Am 19.02.21 um 13:00 schrieb Maxime Ripard:
> > Many drivers reference the plane->state pointer in order to get the
> > current plane state in their atomic_check hook, which would be the old
> > plane state in the global atomic state since _swap_state hasn't happened
> > when atomic_check is run.
> > 
> > Use the drm_atomic_get_old_plane_state helper to get that state to make
> > it more obvious.
> > 
> > This was made using the coccinelle script below:
> > 
> > @ plane_atomic_func @
> > identifier helpers;
> > identifier func;
> > @@
> > 
> > static struct drm_plane_helper_funcs helpers = {
> > 	...,
> > 	.atomic_check = func,
> > 	...,
> > };
> > 
> > @ replaces_old_state @
> > identifier plane_atomic_func.func;
> > identifier plane, state, plane_state;
> > @@
> > 
> >   func(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_atomic_state *state) {
> >   	...
> > -	struct drm_plane_state *plane_state = plane->state;
> > +	struct drm_plane_state *plane_state = drm_atomic_get_old_plane_state(state, plane);
> >   	...
> >   }
> > 
> > @@
> > identifier plane_atomic_func.func;
> > identifier plane, state, plane_state;
> > @@
> > 
> >   func(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_atomic_state *state) {
> >   	struct drm_plane_state *plane_state = drm_atomic_get_old_plane_state(state, plane);
> >   	<...
> > -	plane->state
> > +	plane_state
> >   	...>
> >   }
> > 
> > @ adds_old_state @
> > identifier plane_atomic_func.func;
> > identifier plane, state;
> > @@
> > 
> >   func(struct drm_plane *plane, struct drm_atomic_state *state) {
> > +	struct drm_plane_state *old_plane_state = drm_atomic_get_old_plane_state(state, plane);
> >   	<...
> > -	plane->state
> > +	old_plane_state
> >   	...>
> >   }
> > 
> > @ include depends on adds_old_state || replaces_old_state @
> > @@
> > 
> >   #include <drm/drm_atomic.h>
> > 
> > @ no_include depends on !include && (adds_old_state || replaces_old_state) @
> > @@
> > 
> > + #include <drm/drm_atomic.h>
> >    #include <drm/...>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
> 
> Acked-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
> 
> However, I find 'old plane state' somewhat confusing in this context,
> because it's actually the current plane state. Would it make sense to use
> drm_atomic_get_existing_plane_state() instead?

drm_atomic_get_existing_plane_state is deprecated nowadays, in favour of either
drm_atomic_get_old_plane_state or drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state

Maxime

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel