Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1665704 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-14 13:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-06-15 06:30 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH] sm501fb: Silence a coccinelle script warning. Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> - 2017-06-14 13:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sm501fb: Silence a coccinelle script warning. Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> - 2017-06-15 06:30 +0200
| From | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 13:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] sm501fb: Silence a coccinelle script warning. |
| Message-ID | <tSebM-48n-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi,
On Monday, May 08, 2017 08:11:16 AM Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> According to surrounding goto, it is likely that 'goto err_probed_panel' is
> expected here.
> This change is just done in order to silence some coccinelle scripts
> which try to detect wrongly ordered goto.
>
> If 'info->fb[HEAD_PANEL]' and' 'info->fb[HEAD_CRT]' are both NULL, this
> means that no 'framebuffer_alloc' has been performed, so 'goto err_alloc'
> looks fine.
> Anyway, it is also harmless in this case to call 'framebuffer_release'.
> The code looks more straight forward.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
It seems that the code for supporting only selected framebuffers
(only HEAD_PANEL fb or only HEAD_CRT fb) is broken anyway as at least
the suspend/resume support assumes that both framebuffers are always
present. Also all sm501fb driver users always try try to initialize
both framebuffers. Therefore I would prefer the removal of non-working
individual framebuffers support (the code that your patch modifies
would be removed as well). Could you please look into it?
> ---
> drivers/video/fbdev/sm501fb.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/sm501fb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/sm501fb.c
> index 67e314fdd947..4d89b045ce40 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/sm501fb.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/sm501fb.c
> @@ -1990,7 +1990,7 @@ static int sm501fb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> info->fb[HEAD_CRT] == NULL) {
> dev_err(dev, "no framebuffers found\n");
> ret = -ENODEV;
> - goto err_alloc;
> + goto err_probed_panel;
> }
>
> /* get the resources for both of the framebuffers */
Best regards,
--
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 06:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tSuzT-6bg-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1665704 |
Le 14/06/2017 à 12:54, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz a écrit : > Hi, > > On Monday, May 08, 2017 08:11:16 AM Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> According to surrounding goto, it is likely that 'goto err_probed_panel' is >> expected here. >> This change is just done in order to silence some coccinelle scripts >> which try to detect wrongly ordered goto. >> >> If 'info->fb[HEAD_PANEL]' and' 'info->fb[HEAD_CRT]' are both NULL, this >> means that no 'framebuffer_alloc' has been performed, so 'goto err_alloc' >> looks fine. >> Anyway, it is also harmless in this case to call 'framebuffer_release'. >> The code looks more straight forward. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> > It seems that the code for supporting only selected framebuffers > (only HEAD_PANEL fb or only HEAD_CRT fb) is broken anyway as at least > the suspend/resume support assumes that both framebuffers are always > present. Also all sm501fb driver users always try try to initialize > both framebuffers. Therefore I would prefer the removal of non-working > individual framebuffers support (the code that your patch modifies > would be removed as well). Could you please look into it? Thx for the feedback, but no, I won't be able to go further. I don't know the code enough in this area. Sorry. Best regards, CJ
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web