Re: [PATCH v4 04/19] drm/msm/dpu: drop dpu_mdss_cfg::mdp_count field

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 7/4/2023 10:28 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 at 19:10, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 7/4/2023 4:52 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 at 13:06, Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 at 07:04, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 7/3/2023 7:20 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On 03/07/2023 05:01, Abhinav Kumar wrote:


On 6/19/2023 2:25 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
There is always a single MDP TOP block. Drop the mdp_count field and
stop declaring dpu_mdp_cfg instances as arrays.

Tested-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
---

The change drops mdp_count and stops using the array which is fine and
I will support that.

But looking at the pattern I saw while using core_revision, both
DPU_MDP_VSYNC_SEL and DPU_MDP_AUDIO_SELECT can also be dropped from
the catalog in favor of using core_revision.

Hence for that, I request you not to stop passing dpu_mdss_cfg to
dpu_hw_mdptop_init as that has the necessary information of
core_revision.

Sure, I'll restore it. Please note, however, that it might be better to
pass struct dpu_caps instead of the full struct dpu_mdss_cfg.


Thanks for restoring.

Can you pls explain this better? dpu_core_rev is part of dpu_mdss_cfg,
so dpu_caps wont be enough for this one.

Oh, true. For some reason I thought that version is a part of dpu_caps.

And after additional thought. Maybe it would be better to add a
separate struct dpu_mdss_version and pass it to the hw block init
functions?


I would like to see this evolve. Today, we are assuming that only the hw
block init functions are the places we would use those.

  From what I recall, the DSC over DP series needed the core_revision in
the timing gen code somewhere.

I hope you are talking about the DPU driver here, not about the DP
driver. For the DP driver please use struct msm_dp_desc.


Yes DPU driver.


If we see that pattern is possible once that lands, why not.

Right now, I would leave it at dpu_mdss_cfg.




    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h   |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_0_sm8150.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_5_1_sc8180x.h   |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_0_sm8250.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_2_sc7180.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_3_sm6115.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_4_sm6350.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_5_qcm2290.h   |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_6_9_sm6375.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_7_0_sm8350.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_7_2_sc7280.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_8_0_sc8280xp.h  |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_8_1_sm8450.h    |  7 +---
    .../msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_9_0_sm8550.h    |  7 +---
    .../gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.h    |  1 -
    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_top.c    | 38 +++----------------
    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_top.h    |  8 ++--
    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c       |  4 +-
    19 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-)




--
With best wishes
Dmitry









[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux