> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kandpal, Suraj
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2025 2:25 PM
> To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; intel-xe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Nautiyal, Ankit K <ankit.k.nautiyal@xxxxxxxxx>; Shankar, Uma
> <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx>; Kahola, Mika <mika.kahola@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 05/11] drm/i915/dpll: Move away from using shared dpll
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2025 2:17 PM
> > To: Kandpal, Suraj <suraj.kandpal@xxxxxxxxx>;
> > intel-xe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Nautiyal, Ankit K <ankit.k.nautiyal@xxxxxxxxx>; Shankar, Uma
> > <uma.shankar@xxxxxxxxx>; Kahola, Mika <mika.kahola@xxxxxxxxx>;
> > Kandpal, Suraj <suraj.kandpal@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] drm/i915/dpll: Move away from using shared
> > dpll
> >
> > On Tue, 25 Feb 2025, Suraj Kandpal <suraj.kandpal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Rename functions to move away from using shared dpll in the dpll
> > > framework as much as possible since dpll may not always be shared.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Suraj Kandpal <suraj.kandpal@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.h
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.h
> > > index 6edd103eda55..ef66aca5da1d 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dpll_mgr.h
> > > @@ -387,24 +387,24 @@ struct intel_global_dpll { #define SKL_DPLL2
> > > 2 #define SKL_DPLL3 3
> > >
> > > -/* shared dpll functions */
> > > +/* global dpll functions */
> > > struct intel_global_dpll *
> > > -intel_get_shared_dpll_by_id(struct intel_display *display,
> > > +intel_get_global_dpll_by_id(struct intel_display *display,
> > > enum intel_dpll_id id);
> > > -void assert_shared_dpll(struct intel_display *display,
> > > +void assert_global_dpll(struct intel_display *display,
> > > struct intel_global_dpll *pll,
> > > bool state);
> > > -#define assert_shared_dpll_enabled(d, p) assert_shared_dpll(d, p,
> > > true) -#define assert_shared_dpll_disabled(d, p)
> > > assert_shared_dpll(d, p, false) -int
> > > intel_compute_shared_dplls(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > +#define assert_global_dpll_enabled(d, p) assert_global_dpll(d, p,
> > > +true) #define assert_global_dpll_disabled(d, p)
> > > +assert_global_dpll(d, p, false) int
> > > +intel_compute_global_dplls(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> > > struct intel_encoder *encoder); -int
> > > intel_reserve_shared_dplls(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > +int intel_reserve_global_dplls(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> > > struct intel_encoder *encoder); -void
> > > intel_release_shared_dplls(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > +void intel_release_global_dplls(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > struct intel_crtc *crtc);
> > > -void intel_unreference_shared_dpll_crtc(const struct intel_crtc
> > > *crtc,
> > > +void intel_unreference_global_dpll_crtc(const struct intel_crtc
> > > +*crtc,
> > > const struct intel_global_dpll *pll,
> > > struct intel_dpll_state
> > *shared_dpll_state); void
> > > icl_set_active_port_dpll(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state, @@
> > > -418,10 +418,10 @@ int intel_dpll_get_freq(struct intel_display
> > > *display, bool intel_dpll_get_hw_state(struct intel_display *display,
> > > struct intel_global_dpll *pll,
> > > struct intel_dpll_hw_state *dpll_hw_state); -void
> > > intel_enable_shared_dpll(const struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state);
> > > -void intel_disable_shared_dpll(const struct intel_crtc_state
> > > *crtc_state); -void intel_shared_dpll_swap_state(struct
> > > intel_atomic_state *state); -void intel_shared_dpll_init(struct
> > > intel_display *display);
> > > +void intel_enable_global_dpll(const struct intel_crtc_state
> > > +*crtc_state); void intel_disable_global_dpll(const struct
> > > +intel_crtc_state *crtc_state); void intel_dpll_swap_state(struct
> > > +intel_atomic_state *state); void intel_global_dpll_init(struct
> > > +intel_display *display);
> > > void intel_dpll_update_ref_clks(struct intel_display *display);
> > > void intel_dpll_readout_hw_state(struct intel_display *display);
> > > void intel_dpll_sanitize_state(struct intel_display *display); @@
> > > -437,6
> > > +437,6 @@ bool intel_dpll_is_combophy(enum intel_dpll_id id);
> > >
> > > void intel_dpll_state_verify(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> > > struct intel_crtc *crtc);
> > > -void intel_shared_dpll_verify_disabled(struct intel_atomic_state
> > > *state);
> > > +void intel_global_dpll_verify_disabled(struct intel_atomic_state
> > > +*state);
> > >
> > > #endif /* _INTEL_DPLL_MGR_H_ */
> >
> > If you're renaming almost everything anyway, I'd appreciate moving
> > towards naming functions according to the file name, i.e. functions in
> > intel_foo.[ch] would be named intel_foo_*().
> >
> > The dpll mgr is notoriously bad in this regard. I'm also open to
> > renaming the entire file, intel_dpll_mgr.[ch] isn't all that great.
> >
> > I'm not sure if the term "global" (instead of "shared") was very well
> > justified in patch 3. Maybe all of these should be thought out together for the
> naming.
> >
>
> I agree with the renaming I would have very much have to keep the naming
> simple something like Intel_dpll_func but that exits ! intel_dpll_mgr_funcs but
> intel_dpll_mgr already has some hooks defined inside It.
> I chose global since that way we will be able to represent both PLL using shared
> PHY and PLL with individual PHY.
> Also renaming intel_dpll_mgr.[ch] we have a intel_dpll.[ch] making it a problem
> What if we renamed the file to intel_global_dpll.[ch]
Jani what do you think of this ?
>
> Regards,
> Suraj Kandpal
>
> > BR,
> > Jani.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jani Nikula, Intel
