Re: [PATCH] drm/vblank: Simplify drm_dev_has_vblank()

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:07:35AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> What does vblank have to do with num_crtcs?  Well, this was technically
> correct, but you'd have to go look at where num_crtcs is initialized to
> understand why.  Lets just replace it with the simpler and more obvious
> check.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> index 877e2067534f..ad34c235d853 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c
> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_vblank_init);
>   */
>  bool drm_dev_has_vblank(const struct drm_device *dev)
>  {
> -	return dev->num_crtcs != 0;
> +	return !!dev->vblank;

The compiler knows how to turn things into a boolean.

Or I guess if we want to be a bit more explicit we could
write this as
 return dev->vblank != NULL;
but IIRC that will make checkpatch complain because of
someone's personal taste.

>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_dev_has_vblank);
>  
> -- 
> 2.39.2

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel