On 2023-05-30 01:13:12, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Tue, 30 May 2023 at 00:46, Marijn Suijten > <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 2023-05-26 12:09:45, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > Currently the driver passes the PINGPONG index to > > > dpu_hw_intf_ops::bind_pingpong_blk() callback and uses separate boolean > > > flag to tell whether INTF should be bound or unbound. Simplify this by > > > passing PINGPONG_NONE in case of unbinding and drop the flag completely. > > > > Perhaps worth mentioning that this flag was only recently introduced > > (and link to it as a dependency under the cut), > > The patch is already a part of linux-next. This is the usual boundary > of skipping the dependencies. Excuse me, I forgot about the confusion even after reviewing your patch [1] which introduces PINGPONG_NONE, while DSC v14 (sent 3 days after your patch was applied) also still introduces the same [2]. This patch should likely be rebased and retitled. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20230519234025.2864377-4-dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/1685036458-22683-6-git-send-email-quic_khsieh@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > > as well as explain that > > the passed `enum dpu_pingpong` value is bogus when enable=false because > > it is not part of the value written to the register for the > > "unbind/disable" case? > > Good suggestion. > > > See for example the wording I suggested on the > > patch that introduces and uses PINGPONG_NONE. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_cmd.c | 4 +--- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c | 1 - > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.c | 3 +-- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.h | 1 - > > > > How about appending/sending another patch that drops this from > > dpu_hw_wb.c as well? > > Ack, nice catch. > > > > > > 5 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c > > > index ebe34eda6e50..7fd3a13ac226 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder.c > > > @@ -2102,8 +2102,8 @@ void dpu_encoder_helper_phys_cleanup(struct dpu_encoder_phys *phys_enc) > > > for (i = 0; i < dpu_enc->num_phys_encs; i++) { > > > if (dpu_enc->phys_encs[i] && phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk) > > > phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk( > > > - dpu_enc->phys_encs[i]->hw_intf, false, > > > - dpu_enc->phys_encs[i]->hw_pp->idx); > > > + dpu_enc->phys_encs[i]->hw_intf, > > > + PINGPONG_NONE); > > > > > > /* mark INTF flush as pending */ > > > if (phys_enc->hw_ctl->ops.update_pending_flush_intf) > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_cmd.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_cmd.c > > > index 1a4c20f02312..3130c86a32cc 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_cmd.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_cmd.c > > > @@ -66,7 +66,6 @@ static void _dpu_encoder_phys_cmd_update_intf_cfg( > > > if (test_bit(DPU_CTL_ACTIVE_CFG, &ctl->caps->features) && phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk) > > > phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk( > > > phys_enc->hw_intf, > > > - true, > > > phys_enc->hw_pp->idx); > > > > > > if (phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.enable_compression) > > > @@ -556,8 +555,7 @@ static void dpu_encoder_phys_cmd_disable(struct dpu_encoder_phys *phys_enc) > > > if (phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk) { > > > phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk( > > > phys_enc->hw_intf, > > > - false, > > > - phys_enc->hw_pp->idx); > > > + PINGPONG_NONE); > > > > Is there also a cleanup state where hw_pp is assigned back to NULL? > > No. None of the encoder resources are reassigned to NULL. I will tend > this topic during vN of resource allocation rework. > > > > > > ctl = phys_enc->hw_ctl; > > > ctl->ops.update_pending_flush_intf(ctl, phys_enc->intf_idx); > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c > > > index 3a374292f311..220020273304 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_encoder_phys_vid.c > > > @@ -287,7 +287,6 @@ static void dpu_encoder_phys_vid_setup_timing_engine( > > > if (phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk) > > > phys_enc->hw_intf->ops.bind_pingpong_blk( > > > phys_enc->hw_intf, > > > - true, > > > phys_enc->hw_pp->idx); > > > > > > if (phys_enc->hw_pp->merge_3d) > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.c > > > index a2486f99d3c2..918d154848b9 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_intf.c > > > @@ -268,7 +268,6 @@ static void dpu_hw_intf_setup_prg_fetch( > > > > > > static void dpu_hw_intf_bind_pingpong_blk( > > > struct dpu_hw_intf *intf, > > > - bool enable, > > > const enum dpu_pingpong pp) > > > { > > > struct dpu_hw_blk_reg_map *c = &intf->hw; > > > @@ -277,7 +276,7 @@ static void dpu_hw_intf_bind_pingpong_blk( > > > mux_cfg = DPU_REG_READ(c, INTF_MUX); > > > mux_cfg &= ~0xf; > > > > > > - if (enable) > > > + if (pp != PINGPONG_NONE) > > > > Kuogee just used `if (pp)`, I think we should stay consistent. > > Sure. The rest of the driver usually compares to foo_NONE. If that is the common way to do it, that DSC patch [2] should also use a an explicit comparison instead of assuming PINGPONG_NONE = 0? - Marijn
