From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1759749AbdEOGr4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 15 May 2017 02:47:56 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com ([74.125.82.66]:35525 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1758953AbdEOGry (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 15 May 2017 02:47:54 -0400
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 08:47:49 +0200
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
        Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>,
        Carlos Palminha <CARLOS.PALMINHA@synopsys.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] drm: Use new mode_valid() helpers in connector
 probe helper
Message-ID: <20170515064748.25pk2bkdl3q6zg75@phenom.ffwll.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>,
        Carlos Palminha <CARLOS.PALMINHA@synopsys.com>
References: <cover.1494347164.git.joabreu@synopsys.com>
 <3844793.Y2ncMspPzi@avalon>
 <65a1928f-a5e8-b668-0925-ff233c21c9fe@synopsys.com>
 <1874234.uZ7HLpxeJ2@avalon>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1874234.uZ7HLpxeJ2@avalon>
X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 4.9.0-2-amd64 
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170306 (1.8.0)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 02:04:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Friday 12 May 2017 17:06:14 Jose Abreu wrote:
> > On 12-05-2017 10:35, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 May 2017 18:00:12 Jose Abreu wrote:
> > >> +		if (mode->status == MODE_OK)
> > >> +			mode->status = drm_mode_validate_connector(connector,
> > >> 
> > >>  								   mode);
> > > 
> > > I would reverse the arguments order to match the style of the other
> > > validation functions.
> > 
> > Hmm, I think it makes more sense to pass connector first and then
> > mode ...
> 
> I disagree, as this function validates a mode against a pipeline, the same way 
> the other validation functions validate a mode against other parameters, but 
> it's your patch :-)

Call it drm_connector_validate_mode, because the first argument is
generally the object we operate on :-)
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch