drm/irq: remove check on dev->dev_private
There is no real reason to require drivers to set and use dev->dev_private. Indeed, the current recommendation, as documented in drm_device.h, is to embed struct drm_device in the per-device struct instead of using dev_private. Remove the requirement for dev_private to have been set to indicate driver initialization. For background, quoting Daniel Vetter: Now there might be some hilarious races this papers over, but: - Proper drivers should only call drm_dev_register once everything is set up, including this stuff here. No race possible with anything else really. - Slightly more wobbly drivers, including the legacy ones, all use drm_global_mutex. This was the former BKL, which means that it was impossible for soeone to go through the load/unload/reload (between lastclose and firstopen) paths and also run the ioctl. But the ioctl had to be made unlocked because blocking there killed X: commit 8f4ff2b06afcd6f151868474a432c603057eaf56 Author: Ilija Hadzic <ihadzic@research.bell-labs.com> Date: Mon Oct 31 17:46:18 2011 -0400 drm: do not sleep on vblank while holding a mutex The even more legacy DRM_CONTROL ioctl stayed fully locked. But the file open/close paths are still fully locked, and that's the only place legacy drivers should call drm_irq_install/uninstall, so should all still be fully ordered and protected and happy. Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20200211144753.3175-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
This commit is contained in:
parent
f305047b49
commit
e62bf83aa1
@ -111,10 +111,6 @@ int drm_irq_install(struct drm_device *dev, int irq)
|
||||
if (irq == 0)
|
||||
return -EINVAL;
|
||||
|
||||
/* Driver must have been initialized */
|
||||
if (!dev->dev_private)
|
||||
return -EINVAL;
|
||||
|
||||
if (dev->irq_enabled)
|
||||
return -EBUSY;
|
||||
dev->irq_enabled = true;
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user