On Friday, October 15th, 2021 at 22:03, Sam Ravnborg <s...@ravnborg.org> wrote:
> This code is a little confusing to read.
>
> In case we have only one connector with a change we hit the else part.
> What we really want to find out is if we have one or more connectors
> with a change.
> We could do something like:
>
> struct drm_connector *changed_connector = NULL;
> int changes = 0;
>
>
> ...
>
> /* Find if we have one or more changed connectors */
> drm_for_each_connector_iter(connector, &conn_iter) {
> if (!(connector->polled & DRM_CONNECTOR_POLL_HPD))
> continue;
>
> if (check_connector_changed(connector)) {
> if (!changes) {
> changed_connector = connector;
> drm_connector_get(changed_connector);
> }
>
> changes++;
> }
> }
> drm_connector_list_iter_end(&conn_iter);
> mutex_unlock(&dev->mode_config.mutex);
>
> if (changes == 1)
> drm_kms_helper_connector_hotplug_event(changed_connector);
> else if (changes > 1)
> drm_kms_helper_hotplug_event(dev);
>
> if (changed_connector)
> drm_connector_put(changed_connector);
>
>
> Maybe the only reason why I think this is better is bc I wrote it?!?
Ah, it's not just you, this version is much better. Thanks for the suggestion,
will do that in the next version!
