On Mon, 10 Oct 2022, Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Simplified pps_get_register() which use get_pps_idx() hook to derive the
> pps instance and get_pps_idx() will be initialized at pps_init().
>
> v1: Initial version. Got r-b from Jani.
>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Uma Shankar <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Animesh Manna <animesh.manna@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h
> index e2b853e9e51d..44ab296c1f04 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h
> @@ -1694,6 +1694,7 @@ struct intel_dp {
> u8 (*preemph_max)(struct intel_dp *intel_dp);
> u8 (*voltage_max)(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
> + int (*get_pps_idx)(struct intel_dp *intel_dp);
>
> /* Displayport compliance testing */
> struct intel_dp_compliance compliance;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c
> index 21944f5bf3a8..b972fa6ec00d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_pps.c
> @@ -364,12 +364,10 @@ static void intel_pps_get_registers(struct intel_dp *intel_dp,
> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dp_to_i915(intel_dp);
> int pps_idx = 0;
>
> - memset(regs, 0, sizeof(*regs));
> + if (intel_dp->get_pps_idx)
> + pps_idx = intel_dp->get_pps_idx(intel_dp);
>
> - if (IS_GEMINILAKE(dev_priv) || IS_BROXTON(dev_priv))
> - pps_idx = bxt_power_sequencer_idx(intel_dp);
> - else if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev_priv) || IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev_priv))
> - pps_idx = vlv_power_sequencer_pipe(intel_dp);
> + memset(regs, 0, sizeof(*regs));
It's benign and I've approved this already, but since I keep having to
look at the patch over and over, it has really started bugging me that
the memset() and ->get_pps_idx() calls change their order for no obvious
reason. When you do refactoring, just don't do accidental functional
changes at the same time.
BR,
Jani.
>
> regs->pp_ctrl = PP_CONTROL(pps_idx);
> regs->pp_stat = PP_STATUS(pps_idx);
> @@ -1432,6 +1430,13 @@ void intel_pps_init(struct intel_dp *intel_dp)
> intel_dp->pps.initializing = true;
> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&intel_dp->pps.panel_vdd_work, edp_panel_vdd_work);
>
> + if (IS_GEMINILAKE(i915) || IS_BROXTON(i915))
> + intel_dp->get_pps_idx = bxt_power_sequencer_idx;
> + else if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(i915) || IS_CHERRYVIEW(i915))
> + intel_dp->get_pps_idx = vlv_power_sequencer_pipe;
> + else
> + intel_dp->get_pps_idx = NULL;
> +
> pps_init_timestamps(intel_dp);
>
> with_intel_pps_lock(intel_dp, wakeref) {
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
