Boris,
On 3/11/25 4:51 AM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 16:59:18 -0300
Ariel D'Alessandro <ariel.dalessandro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Both these functions write to MMU_AS_CONTROL register in the same way.
Define a common _panfrost_mmu_as_control_write function with the shared
code.
Signed-off-by: Ariel D'Alessandro <ariel.dalessandro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c | 33 ++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c
index 294f86b3c25e7..31df3a96f89bd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panfrost/panfrost_mmu.c
@@ -121,38 +121,37 @@ static int mmu_hw_do_operation(struct panfrost_device *pfdev,
return ret;
}
-static void panfrost_mmu_enable(struct panfrost_device *pfdev, struct panfrost_mmu *mmu)
+static void
+_panfrost_mmu_as_control_write(struct panfrost_device *pfdev, u32 as_nr,
+ u64 transtab, u64 memattr)
I'm honestly not convinced this is needed. Let's just stick to
panfrost_mmu_enable/disable().
Ok, will drop in v2.
Thanks!
--
Ariel D'Alessandro
Software Engineer
Collabora Ltd.
Platinum Building, St John's Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS, UK
Registered in England & Wales, no. 5513718
