drm/i915: pdev cleanup
In an effort to simplify things for a future push of dev_priv instead of dev wherever possible, always take pdev via dev_priv where feasible, eliminating the direct access from dev. Right now this only eliminates a few cases of dev, but it also obviates that we pass dev into a lot of functions where dev_priv would be the more obvious choice. v2: Fixed one more place missing in the previous patch set Signed-off-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20160822103245.24069-5-david.weinehall@linux.intel.com Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Este cometimento está contido em:

cometido por
Chris Wilson

ascendente
694c282845
cometimento
52a05c302b
@@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ static void i915_restore_display(struct drm_device *dev)
|
||||
int i915_save_state(struct drm_device *dev)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
|
||||
struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_priv->drm.pdev;
|
||||
int i;
|
||||
|
||||
mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
|
||||
@@ -70,7 +71,7 @@ int i915_save_state(struct drm_device *dev)
|
||||
i915_save_display(dev);
|
||||
|
||||
if (IS_GEN4(dev))
|
||||
pci_read_config_word(dev->pdev, GCDGMBUS,
|
||||
pci_read_config_word(pdev, GCDGMBUS,
|
||||
&dev_priv->regfile.saveGCDGMBUS);
|
||||
|
||||
/* Cache mode state */
|
||||
@@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ int i915_save_state(struct drm_device *dev)
|
||||
int i915_restore_state(struct drm_device *dev)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev);
|
||||
struct pci_dev *pdev = dev_priv->drm.pdev;
|
||||
int i;
|
||||
|
||||
mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
|
||||
@@ -115,7 +117,7 @@ int i915_restore_state(struct drm_device *dev)
|
||||
i915_gem_restore_fences(dev);
|
||||
|
||||
if (IS_GEN4(dev))
|
||||
pci_write_config_word(dev->pdev, GCDGMBUS,
|
||||
pci_write_config_word(pdev, GCDGMBUS,
|
||||
dev_priv->regfile.saveGCDGMBUS);
|
||||
i915_restore_display(dev);
|
||||
|
||||
|
Criar uma nova questão referindo esta
Bloquear um utilizador