drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 drm: gma500: Convert timers to use timer_setup()
In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer() to pass the timer pointer explicitly.
--- drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c | 8 +++----- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c +3 -5
@@ -23,9 +23,9 @@#include "psb_intel_reg.h" #include <linux/spinlock.h> -static void psb_lid_timer_func (unsigned long data) +static void psb_lid_timer_func (struct timer_list *t) { -struct drm_psb_private * dev_priv = (struct drm_psb_private *)data; +struct drm_psb_private *dev_priv =from_timer (dev_priv, t, lid_timer);struct drm_device *dev = (struct drm_device *)dev_priv->dev;struct timer_list *lid_timer = &dev_priv->lid_timer;unsigned long irq_flags;
@@ -77,10 +77,8 @@ void psb_lid_timer_init(struct drm_psb_private *dev_priv)spin_lock_init (&dev_priv->lid_lock);spin_lock_irqsave (&dev_priv->lid_lock, irq_flags); -init_timer (lid_timer); +timer_setup (lid_timer, psb_lid_timer_func,0 ); - lid_timer->data = (unsigned long )dev_priv; - lid_timer->function = psb_lid_timer_func; lid_timer->expires = jiffies +PSB_LID_DELAY ;add_timer (lid_timer);
Signature · 6 lines
2.7.4 -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
Quoted 8 lines · Kees Cook
In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct
timer_listpointer to all timer callbacks, switch to using the newtimer_setup()andfrom_timer()to pass the timer pointer explicitly.Cc Patrik Jakobsson <[email protected]>Cc David Airlie <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger refactoring?
A notch more context in the commit message would help ... -Daniel
Quoted 43 lines
--- drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c | 8 +++----- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_lid.c +3
-5@@ -23,9 +23,9 @@#include "psb_intel_reg.h" #include <linux/spinlock.h> -static void psb_lid_timer_func (unsigned long data) +static void psb_lid_timer_func (struct timer_list *t) { -struct drm_psb_private * dev_priv = (struct drm_psb_private *)data; +struct drm_psb_private *dev_priv =from_timer (dev_priv, t, lid_timer);struct drm_device *dev = (struct drm_device *)dev_priv->dev;struct timer_list *lid_timer = &dev_priv->lid_timer;unsigned long irq_flags;@@ -77,10 +77,8 @@ void psb_lid_timer_init(struct drm_psb_private *dev_priv)spin_lock_init (&dev_priv->lid_lock);spin_lock_irqsave (&dev_priv->lid_lock, irq_flags); -init_timer (lid_timer); +timer_setup (lid_timer, psb_lid_timer_func,0 ); - lid_timer->data = (unsigned long )dev_priv; - lid_timer->function = psb_lid_timer_func; lid_timer->expires = jiffies +PSB_LID_DELAY ;add_timer (lid_timer);Signature · 10 lines
2.7.4 -- Kees Cook Pixel Security _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Signature · 7 lines
Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 8 lines · Kees Cook
In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct
timer_listpointer to all timer callbacks, switch to using the newtimer_setup()andfrom_timer()to pass the timer pointer explicitly.Cc Patrik Jakobsson <[email protected]>Cc David Airlie <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger refactoring?
If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that too.
Quoted 1 line
A notch more context in the commit message would help ...
Sorry about that, my added context for this go lost in later conversion patches.
-Kees
Signature · 2 lines
Kees Cook Pixel Security
Daniel Vetter
AppliedQuoted 11 lines · Kees Cook
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 8 lines · Kees Cook
In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct
timer_listpointer to all timer callbacks, switch to using the newtimer_setup()andfrom_timer()to pass the timer pointer explicitly.Cc Patrik Jakobsson <[email protected]>Cc David Airlie <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger refactoring?
If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that too.
Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15 already).
Thanks, Daniel
Quoted 14 lines
Quoted 2 lines
A notch more context in the commit message would help ...
Sorry about that, my added context for this go lost in later conversion patches.
-Kees
Signature · 6 lines
Kees Cook Pixel Security _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Signature · 7 lines
Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Quoted 12 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 11 lines · Kees Cook
Quoted 10 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 8 lines · Kees Cook
In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct
timer_listpointer to all timer callbacks, switch to using the newtimer_setup()andfrom_timer()to pass the timer pointer explicitly.Cc Patrik Jakobsson <[email protected]>Cc David Airlie <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger refactoring?
If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that too.
Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15 already).
Since this is one of the few remaining "non-trivial" users of the ancient init_timer() API, would you mind if the timers tree carried this for 4.15? I'm trying to entirely remove the init_timer() API (and if I can, remove the old setup_*timer() API too).
Thanks!
-Kees
Signature · 2 lines
Kees Cook Pixel Security
Daniel Vetter
Acked-byQuoted 19 lines · Kees Cook
Quoted 18 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 16 lines · Kees Cook
Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 8 lines · Kees Cook
In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct
timer_listpointer to all timer callbacks, switch to using the newtimer_setup()andfrom_timer()to pass the timer pointer explicitly.Cc Patrik Jakobsson <[email protected]>Cc David Airlie <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>Do you expect drm folks to apply this, or is this part of a larger refactoring?
If the drm tree includes -rc3, you can carry these. If you don't want to carry these and want the timer tree to carry them, we can do that too.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Applied to drm-misc-next for 4.16 (we're way past freeze for 4.15 already).
Since this is one of the few remaining "non-trivial" users of the ancient
init_timer()API, would you mind if the timers tree carried this for 4.15? I'm trying to entirely remove theinit_timer()API (and if I can, remove the old setup_*timer() API too).
I was contemplating before applying it whether I should ask ...
Oh well, problem is that drm-misc is non-rebasing, but you can just apply it twice. git usually figures it out.
in case you do so.
-Daniel
Signature · 3 lines
Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch