drm/qxl: use qxl_num_crtc directly

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

Signed-off-by Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]>

---
 drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c | 21 +++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c +3 -3

index ce0b9c40fc..6437369a31 100644
@@ -80,10 +80,10 @@ static int
 qxl_display_copy_rom_client_monitors_config(struct qxl_device *qdev)
 		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("no client monitors configured\n");
 		return status;
 	}
-	if (num_monitors > qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed) {
+	if (num_monitors > qxl_num_crtc) {
 		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("client monitors list will be truncated: %d < %d\n",
-			      qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed, num_monitors);
-		num_monitors = qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed;
+			      qxl_num_crtc, num_monitors);
+		num_monitors = qxl_num_crtc;
 	} else {
 		num_monitors = qdev->rom->client_monitors_config.count;

drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c +1 -2

 	}

@@ -96,8 +96,7 @@ static int
 qxl_display_copy_rom_client_monitors_config(struct qxl_device *qdev)
 		return status;
 	}
 	/* we copy max from the client but it isn't used */
-	qdev->client_monitors_config->max_allowed =
-				qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed;
+	qdev->client_monitors_config->max_allowed = qxl_num_crtc;
 	for (i = 0 ; i < qdev->client_monitors_config->count ; ++i) {
 		struct qxl_urect *c_rect =

drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c +1 -1

 			&qdev->rom->client_monitors_config.heads[i];

@@ -204,7 +203,7 @@ static int qxl_add_monitors_config_modes(struct
 drm_connector *connector,
 
 	if (!qdev->monitors_config)
 		return 0;
-	if (h >= qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed)
+	if (h >= qxl_num_crtc)
 		return 0;
 	if (!qdev->client_monitors_config)

drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c +1 -2

 		return 0;

@@ -307,8 +306,7 @@ static void qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config(struct
 drm_crtc *crtc,
 		return;
 	}
 
-	if (!qdev->monitors_config ||
-	    qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed <= i)
+	if (!qdev->monitors_config || qxl_num_crtc <= i)
 		return;
 

drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c +3 -3

 	head.id = i;

@@ -348,9 +346,10 @@ static void qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config(struct
 drm_crtc *crtc,
 	if (oldcount != qdev->monitors_config->count)
 		DRM_DEBUG_KMS("active heads %d -> %d (%d total)\n",
 			      oldcount, qdev->monitors_config->count,
-			      qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed);
+			      qxl_num_crtc);
 
 	qdev->monitors_config->heads[i] = head;
+	qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed = qxl_num_crtc;
 	qxl_send_monitors_config(qdev);
 }

@@ -1097,9 +1096,8 @@ int qxl_create_monitors_object(struct qxl_device *qdev)
 {
 	int ret;
 	struct drm_gem_object *gobj;
-	int max_allowed = qxl_num_crtc;
 	int monitors_config_size = sizeof(struct qxl_monitors_config) +
-		max_allowed * sizeof(struct qxl_head);
+		qxl_num_crtc * sizeof(struct qxl_head);
 
 	ret = qxl_gem_object_create(qdev, monitors_config_size, 0,
 				    QXL_GEM_DOMAIN_VRAM,

Quoted 5 lines

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of monitors.

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of monitors.

Yes, spice/qxl and drm/kms use slightly different terminology.

drm crtc == qxl monitor.
drm framebuffer == qxl surface.

You need to know that anyway when looking at the qxl ksm code. We have function names like qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config(). I fail to see why that is a problem ...

cheers,
Gerd

Quoted 22 lines · Frediano Ziglio

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of monitors.

Yes, spice/qxl and drm/kms use slightly different terminology.

drm crtc == qxl monitor.
drm framebuffer == qxl surface.

You need to know that anyway when looking at the qxl ksm code. We have function names like qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config(). I fail to see why that is a problem ...

Quoted 2 lines

cheers,
Gerd

I don't see any problem too but you are explaining to me why your rationale "and also is less confusing" does not stand.

Quoted 25 lines

Quoted 24 lines · Frediano Ziglio

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of monitors.

Yes, spice/qxl and drm/kms use slightly different terminology.

drm crtc == qxl monitor.
drm framebuffer == qxl surface.

You need to know that anyway when looking at the qxl ksm code. We have function names like qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config(). I fail to see why that is a problem ...

cheers,
Gerd

Quoted 3 lines

I don't see any problem too but you are explaining to me why your rationale "and also is less confusing" does not stand.

Well, it's less confusing because it takes away an indirection (not because of the naming).

qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed is effectively set by a module parameter. So using the module parameter variable qxl_num_crtc directly is better IMO. The kernel doesn't need to dereference pointers each time it needs the value, and when reading the code you don't have to trace where and why qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed is set.

cheers,
Gerd

Quoted 5 lines

qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed is effectively set by a module parameter. So using the module parameter variable qxl_num_crtc directly is better IMO. The kernel doesn't need to dereference pointers each time it needs the value, and when reading the code you don't have to trace where and why qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed is set.

That should go to the commit message!
With that the patch is fine for me.

Maybe there's no much point on reusing the same structure used inside QXLRom/QXLRam but this is OT for this patch.

Quoted 5 lines

qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed is effectively set by a module parameter. So using the module parameter variable qxl_num_crtc directly is better IMO. The kernel doesn't need to dereference pointers each time it needs the value, and when reading the code you don't have to trace where and why qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed is set.

That should go to the commit message!
With that the patch is fine for me.

Maybe there's no much point on reusing the same structure used inside QXLRom/QXLRam but this is OT for this patch.

Quoted 22 lines · Frediano Ziglio

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of monitors.

Yes, spice/qxl and drm/kms use slightly different terminology.

drm crtc == qxl monitor.
drm framebuffer == qxl surface.

You need to know that anyway when looking at the qxl ksm code. We have function names like qxl_crtc_update_monitors_config(). I fail to see why that is a problem ...

Quoted 2 lines

cheers,
Gerd

I don't see any problem too but you are explaining to me why your rationale "and also is less confusing" does not stand.

Quoted 5 lines

Just use qxl_num_crtc directly everywhere instead of using qdev->monitors_config->max_allowed. Drops pointless indirection and also is less confusing.

To me is MORE confusing, why comparing number of something with another number? Previously code was comparing number of monitors with number of monitors, not number of CRTs with number of monitors.