Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:23:58 +0100 | From | Daniel Vetter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drm/bochs: Fix NULL dereference on atomic_disable helper |
| |
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 02:07:16PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > > > static void bochs_crtc_atomic_flush(struct drm_crtc *crtc, > > > > struct drm_crtc_state *old_crtc_state) > > > > { > > > > @@ -66,6 +71,7 @@ static const struct drm_crtc_funcs bochs_crtc_funcs = { > > > > static const struct drm_crtc_helper_funcs bochs_helper_funcs = { > > > > .mode_set_nofb = bochs_crtc_mode_set_nofb, > > > > .atomic_enable = bochs_crtc_atomic_enable, > > > > + .atomic_disable = bochs_crtc_atomic_disable, > > > > > > Shouldn't we make the callback optional instead of adding empty dummy > > > functions to drivers? > > > > Hi Gerd, > > > > I agree, and I can work in this issue. > > Just one question, should we make atomic_enable optional as well? > > IIRC the drm code checks for the atomic_enable callback presence to > figure whenever it should take the atomic or legacy code paths.
It should check for drm_driver->mode_config.funcs.atomic_commit for that, see drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset(). Anything else should be a bug.
Or do you mean the fallback to the old crtc helper prepare/commit callbacks? We'd need to make all of them optional ofc, with atomic_ variants being preferred ofc. -Daniel
> > So, I think that will not work. > > cheers, > Gerd >
-- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
| |