On 05/04/2023 01:12, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
On 4/4/2023 6:05 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On sm8450 platform the CTL_0 doesn't differ from the rest of CTL blocks,
so switch it to CTL_SC7280_MASK too.
Some background: original commit 100d7ef6995d ("drm/msm/dpu: add support
for SM8450") had all (relevant at that time) bit spelled individually.
Then commit 0e91bcbb0016 ("drm/msm/dpu: Add SM8350 to hw catalog"),
despite being a mismerge, correctly changed all other CTL entries to use
CTL_SC7280_MASK, except CTL_0.
I think having it spelled individually is better. If we start using one
chipset's mask for another, we are again going down the same path of
this becoming one confused file.
So, even though I agree that 0e91bcbb0016 ("drm/msm/dpu: Add SM8350 to
hw catalog") corrected the mask to re-use sc7280, with the individual
catalog file, its better to have it separate and spelled individually.
This change is not heading in the direction of the rest of the series.
I didn't create duplicates of all the defines. This is done well in the
style of patch37. I'm not going to add all per-SoC feature masks.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
index 6840b22a4159..83f8f83e2b29 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
@@ -975,7 +975,7 @@ static const struct dpu_ctl_cfg sm8450_ctl[] = {
{
.name = "ctl_0", .id = CTL_0,
.base = 0x15000, .len = 0x204,
- .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG) | BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY)
| BIT(DPU_CTL_FETCH_ACTIVE),
+ .features = BIT(DPU_CTL_SPLIT_DISPLAY) | CTL_SC7280_MASK,
.intr_start = DPU_IRQ_IDX(MDP_SSPP_TOP0_INTR2, 9),
},
{
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
