Hi Maarten, Thanks for reviewing. Comments below. On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 16:30 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 26-02-16 om 14:54 schreef Ander Conselvan de Oliveira: > > Use a table to store the per-platform shared dpll information in one > > place. This way, there is no need for platform specific init funtions. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ander Conselvan de Oliveira < > > ander.conselvan.de.oliveira@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 16 +-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c | 189 ++++++++++++++++--------------- > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.h | 22 ++-- > > 3 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > index e723323..133b6b7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c > > @@ -9148,8 +9148,8 @@ static bool ironlake_get_pipe_config(struct intel_crtc > > *crtc, > > intel_get_shared_dpll_by_id(dev_priv, pll_id); > > pll = pipe_config->shared_dpll; > > > > - WARN_ON(!pll->get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > - &pipe_config->dpll_hw_state)); > > + WARN_ON(!pll->funcs.get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > + &pipe_config > > ->dpll_hw_state)); > > > > tmp = pipe_config->dpll_hw_state.dpll; > > pipe_config->pixel_multiplier = > > @@ -9695,8 +9695,8 @@ static void haswell_get_ddi_port_state(struct > > intel_crtc *crtc, > > > > pll = pipe_config->shared_dpll; > > if (pll) { > > - WARN_ON(!pll->get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > - &pipe_config->dpll_hw_state)); > > + WARN_ON(!pll->funcs.get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > + &pipe_config > > ->dpll_hw_state)); > > } > > > > /* > > @@ -12728,7 +12728,7 @@ check_shared_dpll_state(struct drm_device *dev) > > > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("%s\n", pll->name); > > > > - active = pll->get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, &dpll_hw_state); > > + active = pll->funcs.get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > &dpll_hw_state); > > > > I915_STATE_WARN(pll->active > hweight32(pll > > ->config.crtc_mask), > > "more active pll users than references: %i vs %i\n", > > @@ -15466,8 +15466,8 @@ static void intel_modeset_readout_hw_state(struct > > drm_device *dev) > > for (i = 0; i < dev_priv->num_shared_dpll; i++) { > > struct intel_shared_dpll *pll = &dev_priv->shared_dplls[i]; > > > > - pll->on = pll->get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > - &pll->config.hw_state); > > + pll->on = pll->funcs.get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, > > + &pll->config.hw_state); > > pll->active = 0; > > pll->config.crtc_mask = 0; > > for_each_intel_crtc(dev, crtc) { > > @@ -15602,7 +15602,7 @@ intel_modeset_setup_hw_state(struct drm_device *dev) > > > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("%s enabled but not in use, disabling\n", pll > > ->name); > > > > - pll->disable(dev_priv, pll); > > + pll->funcs.disable(dev_priv, pll); > > pll->on = false; > > } > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > index 889ceed..e88dc46 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dpll_mgr.c > > @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ void assert_shared_dpll(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > if (WARN(!pll, "asserting DPLL %s with no DPLL\n", onoff(state))) > > return; > > > > - cur_state = pll->get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, &hw_state); > > + cur_state = pll->funcs.get_hw_state(dev_priv, pll, &hw_state); > > I915_STATE_WARN(cur_state != state, > > "%s assertion failure (expected %s, current %s)\n", > > pll->name, onoff(state), onoff(cur_state)); > > @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ void intel_prepare_shared_dpll(struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > WARN_ON(pll->on); > > assert_shared_dpll_disabled(dev_priv, pll); > > > > - pll->mode_set(dev_priv, pll); > > + pll->funcs.mode_set(dev_priv, pll); > > } > > } > > > > @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ void intel_enable_shared_dpll(struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > intel_display_power_get(dev_priv, POWER_DOMAIN_PLLS); > > > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("enabling %s\n", pll->name); > > - pll->enable(dev_priv, pll); > > + pll->funcs.enable(dev_priv, pll); > > pll->on = true; > > } > > > > @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ void intel_disable_shared_dpll(struct intel_crtc *crtc) > > return; > > > > DRM_DEBUG_KMS("disabling %s\n", pll->name); > > - pll->disable(dev_priv, pll); > > + pll->funcs.disable(dev_priv, pll); > > pll->on = false; > > > > intel_display_power_put(dev_priv, POWER_DOMAIN_PLLS); > > @@ -398,29 +398,13 @@ static void ibx_pch_dpll_disable(struct > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > udelay(200); > > } > > > > -static char *ibx_pch_dpll_names[] = { > > - "PCH DPLL A", > > - "PCH DPLL B", > > +static const struct intel_shared_dpll_funcs ibx_pch_dpll_funcs = { > > + .mode_set = ibx_pch_dpll_mode_set, > > + .enable = ibx_pch_dpll_enable, > > + .disable = ibx_pch_dpll_disable, > > + .get_hw_state = ibx_pch_dpll_get_hw_state, > > }; > > > > -static void ibx_pch_dpll_init(struct drm_device *dev) > > -{ > > - struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; > > - int i; > > - > > - dev_priv->num_shared_dpll = 2; > > - > > - for (i = 0; i < dev_priv->num_shared_dpll; i++) { > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].id = i; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].name = ibx_pch_dpll_names[i]; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].mode_set = ibx_pch_dpll_mode_set; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].enable = ibx_pch_dpll_enable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].disable = ibx_pch_dpll_disable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].get_hw_state = > > - ibx_pch_dpll_get_hw_state; > > - } > > -} > > - > > static void hsw_ddi_wrpll_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > struct intel_shared_dpll *pll) > > { > > @@ -492,40 +476,16 @@ static bool hsw_ddi_spll_get_hw_state(struct > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > } > > > > > > -static const char * const hsw_ddi_pll_names[] = { > > - "WRPLL 1", > > - "WRPLL 2", > > - "SPLL" > > +static const struct intel_shared_dpll_funcs hsw_ddi_wrpll_funcs = { > > + .enable = hsw_ddi_wrpll_enable, > > + .disable = hsw_ddi_wrpll_disable, > > + .get_hw_state = hsw_ddi_wrpll_get_hw_state, > > }; > > > > -static void hsw_shared_dplls_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > -{ > > - int i; > > - > > - dev_priv->num_shared_dpll = 3; > > - > > - for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) { > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].id = i; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].name = hsw_ddi_pll_names[i]; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].disable = hsw_ddi_wrpll_disable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].enable = hsw_ddi_wrpll_enable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].get_hw_state = > > - hsw_ddi_wrpll_get_hw_state; > > - } > > - > > - /* SPLL is special, but needs to be initialized anyway.. */ > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].id = i; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].name = hsw_ddi_pll_names[i]; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].disable = hsw_ddi_spll_disable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].enable = hsw_ddi_spll_enable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].get_hw_state = hsw_ddi_spll_get_hw_state; > > - > > -} > > - > > -static const char * const skl_ddi_pll_names[] = { > > - "DPLL 1", > > - "DPLL 2", > > - "DPLL 3", > > +static const struct intel_shared_dpll_funcs hsw_ddi_spll_funcs = { > > + .enable = hsw_ddi_spll_enable, > > + .disable = hsw_ddi_spll_disable, > > + .get_hw_state = hsw_ddi_spll_get_hw_state, > > }; > > > > struct skl_dpll_regs { > > @@ -634,26 +594,10 @@ out: > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static void skl_shared_dplls_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > -{ > > - int i; > > - > > - dev_priv->num_shared_dpll = 3; > > - > > - for (i = 0; i < dev_priv->num_shared_dpll; i++) { > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].id = i; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].name = skl_ddi_pll_names[i]; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].disable = skl_ddi_pll_disable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].enable = skl_ddi_pll_enable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].get_hw_state = > > - skl_ddi_pll_get_hw_state; > > - } > > -} > > - > > -static const char * const bxt_ddi_pll_names[] = { > > - "PORT PLL A", > > - "PORT PLL B", > > - "PORT PLL C", > > +static const struct intel_shared_dpll_funcs skl_ddi_pll_funcs = { > > + .enable = skl_ddi_pll_enable, > > + .disable = skl_ddi_pll_disable, > > + .get_hw_state = skl_ddi_pll_get_hw_state, > > }; > > > > static void bxt_ddi_pll_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > @@ -838,34 +782,17 @@ out: > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static void bxt_shared_dplls_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > -{ > > - int i; > > - > > - dev_priv->num_shared_dpll = 3; > > - > > - for (i = 0; i < dev_priv->num_shared_dpll; i++) { > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].id = i; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].name = bxt_ddi_pll_names[i]; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].disable = bxt_ddi_pll_disable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].enable = bxt_ddi_pll_enable; > > - dev_priv->shared_dplls[i].get_hw_state = > > - bxt_ddi_pll_get_hw_state; > > - } > > -} > > +static const struct intel_shared_dpll_funcs bxt_ddi_pll_funcs = { > > + .enable = bxt_ddi_pll_enable, > > + .disable = bxt_ddi_pll_disable, > > + .get_hw_state = bxt_ddi_pll_get_hw_state, > > +}; > > > > static void intel_ddi_pll_init(struct drm_device *dev) > > { > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; > > uint32_t val = I915_READ(LCPLL_CTL); > > > > - if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) || IS_KABYLAKE(dev)) > > - skl_shared_dplls_init(dev_priv); > > - else if (IS_BROXTON(dev)) > > - bxt_shared_dplls_init(dev_priv); > > - else > > - hsw_shared_dplls_init(dev_priv); > > - > > if (IS_SKYLAKE(dev) || IS_KABYLAKE(dev)) { > > int cdclk_freq; > > > > @@ -893,16 +820,72 @@ static void intel_ddi_pll_init(struct drm_device *dev) > > } > > } > > > > +struct dpll_info { > > + const char *name; > > + const int id; > > + const struct intel_shared_dpll_funcs *funcs; > > +}; > > + > Seems shared_dplls[i].id == i, so that could be removed. There are places in the code that assume those are equal. I considered not including the id, but concluded that having the id and a WARN_ON() in intel_shared_dpll_init() documents that assumption better. I think it would be better to remove that assumption, but that require changes to intel_atomic_state and users. But I think it would be nice if we could have a per-DPLL state object. > If you also move name to funcs you could kill this struct. In a later patch I add a flags field to this struct. I guess I could move that to funcs too, but then we need to come up with a better name for that struct. "funcs" starts to sound wrong. IMO having that extra struct is fine, so I rather let things settle first and then do another round of clean ups. But if that is a no-go, I can re-spin. Thanks, Ander _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx