On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 01:59:42PM +0530, Sharma, Shashank wrote:
>
> On 9/25/2019 7:25 PM, Ville Syrjala wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Now that the cea mode handling is not 100% tied to the single
> > array the dummy VIC 0 mode is pretty much pointles. Throw it
> > out.
> >
> > Cc: Hans Verkuil <hansverk@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Shashank Sharma <shashank.sharma@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c | 14 +++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > index 9f6996323efa..0007004d3221 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_edid.c
> > @@ -709,11 +709,9 @@ static const struct minimode extra_modes[] = {
> > /*
> > * From CEA/CTA-861 spec.
> > *
> > - * Index with VIC.
> > + * Index with VIC-1.
>
> Do we want to really do this ? Till now, due to dummy VIC, indexing was
> pretty direct as per VIC, which was making the code easy to read and
> understand. I would still think that keeping the dummy VIC and adjusting
> the size of cea_modes_0[] in the size function, would be something
> neater to do, do you think so ?
I don't see the point of wasting that space. The access is now fully
abstraced so you *never* index this directly.
>
> - Shashank
>
> > */
> > -static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_0[] = {
> > - /* 0 - dummy, VICs start at 1 */
> > - { },
> > +static const struct drm_display_mode edid_cea_modes_1[] = {
> > /* 1 - 640x480@60Hz 4:3 */
> > { DRM_MODE("640x480", DRM_MODE_TYPE_DRIVER, 25175, 640, 656,
> > 752, 800, 0, 480, 490, 492, 525, 0,
> > @@ -3211,10 +3209,8 @@ static u8 *drm_find_cea_extension(const struct edid *edid)
> >
> > static const struct drm_display_mode *cea_mode_for_vic(u8 vic)
> > {
> > - if (!vic)
> > - return NULL;
> > - if (vic < ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
> > - return &edid_cea_modes_0[vic];
> > + if (vic >= 1 && vic < 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
> > + return &edid_cea_modes_1[vic - 1];
> > if (vic >= 193 && vic < 193 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_193))
> > return &edid_cea_modes_193[vic - 193];
> > return NULL;
> > @@ -3227,7 +3223,7 @@ static u8 cea_num_vics(void)
> >
> > static u8 cea_next_vic(u8 vic)
> > {
> > - if (++vic == ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_0))
> > + if (++vic == 1 + ARRAY_SIZE(edid_cea_modes_1))
> > vic = 193;
> > return vic;
> > }
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
