On Thu, 22 Aug 2019, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 8/20/19 11:00 AM, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/20/19 8:42 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 04:01:47 +0200, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio
>>> <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_reg_types.h
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_reg_types.h
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 000000000000..87bce80dd5ed
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_reg_types.h
>>>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +typedef struct {
>>>> + u32 reg;
>>>> +} i915_reg_t;
>>>> +
>>>> +#define _MMIO(r) ((const i915_reg_t){ .reg = (r) })
>>>> +
>>>> +#define INVALID_MMIO_REG _MMIO(0)
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline u32 i915_mmio_reg_offset(i915_reg_t reg)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return reg.reg;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline bool i915_mmio_reg_equal(i915_reg_t a, i915_reg_t b)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return i915_mmio_reg_offset(a) == i915_mmio_reg_offset(b);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline bool i915_mmio_reg_valid(i915_reg_t reg)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return !i915_mmio_reg_equal(reg, INVALID_MMIO_REG);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>
>>> hmm, there is now disconnection between prefixes in:
>>>
>>> 'intel'_reg_types.h
>>> and
>>> 'i915'_reg_t
>>> 'i915'_mmio_reg_xxx()
>>>
>>> that is why I was suggesting to keep:
>>>
>>> 'i915'_reg.h (or at your preference 'i915'_reg_types.h)
>>> with
>>> 'i915'_reg_t
>>> 'i915'_mmio_reg_xxx()
>>>
>>> and use intel_reg* files for actual hw definitions.
>>>
>>> if we don't plan to rename i915_reg_t into intel_mmio_reg_t
>>> then maybe better to stay with i915_reg_types.h ?
>>>
>>
>> I'd personally prefer to keep the intel_* prefix and flip i915_reg_t to
>> intel_reg_t (as a second step to keep things simple). But given the size
>> of the change I'd prefer to hear some more opinions before going through
>> with it, so I'll wait a bit for more comments.
>>
>> Daniele
>>
>
> Chris, Jani, are you ok if I got with Michal's suggestion for now, i.e.
> i915_reg_types.h and intel_reg.h?
There's really nothing in this patch that requires you to rename
i915_reg.h at all. The subject of the patch is about adding a new file
for the types; the rename seems like an afterthought.
I guess we'll add a display/<something>_reg.h later. But that doesn't
require this rename either.
BR,
Jani.
>
> Daniele
>
>>> Michal
>>>
>>> ps. i915/intel prefix rules are killing me too ;)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Intel-gfx mailing list
>> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
