Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/msm/dpu: Drop unused num argument from relevant macros

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 23/06/2023 02:48, Ryan McCann wrote:
Drop unused parameter "num" from VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE and DMA sub block
macros. Update calls to relevant macros to reflect change.

This is not relevant for this patchset.

With https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/534745/?series=116851&rev=2 in place, VIG_SBLK and VIG_SBLK_ROT should also stop using num. But let's probably take another step forward and drop both arguments and use just a single instance of sblk per platform. I'll send a patch for it.


Signed-off-by: Ryan McCann <quic_rmccann@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
index 0de507d4d7b7..69200b4cf210 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
@@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ static const uint32_t wb2_formats[] = {
  	.rotation_cfg = rot_cfg, \
  	}
-#define _DMA_SBLK(num, sdma_pri) \
+#define _DMA_SBLK(sdma_pri) \
  	{ \
  	.maxdwnscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
  	.maxupscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
@@ -323,10 +323,10 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_vig_sblk_2 =
  static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_vig_sblk_3 =
  				_VIG_SBLK("3", 8, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED3);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_0 = _DMA_SBLK("8", 1);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_1 = _DMA_SBLK("9", 2);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_2 = _DMA_SBLK("10", 3);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_3 = _DMA_SBLK("11", 4);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_0 = _DMA_SBLK(1);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_1 = _DMA_SBLK(2);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_2 = _DMA_SBLK(3);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_3 = _DMA_SBLK(4);
#define SSPP_BLK(_name, _id, _base, _len, _features, \
  		_sblk, _xinid, _type, _clkctrl) \
@@ -365,11 +365,11 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_vig_sblk_1 =
  static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_vig_sblk_2 =
  				_VIG_SBLK("2", 9, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED4);
  static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_vig_sblk_3 =
-				_VIG_SBLK("3", 10, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED4);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_4 = _DMA_SBLK("12", 5);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_5 = _DMA_SBLK("13", 6);
+				_VIG_SBLK(10, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED4);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_4 = _DMA_SBLK(5);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_5 = _DMA_SBLK(6);
-#define _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE(num, sdma_pri) \
+#define _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE(sdma_pri) \
  	{ \
  	.maxdwnscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
  	.maxupscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
@@ -380,8 +380,8 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_5 = _DMA_SBLK("13", 6);
  	.virt_num_formats = ARRAY_SIZE(plane_formats), \
  	}
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_vig_sblk_0 = _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE("0", 2);
-static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_dma_sblk_0 = _DMA_SBLK("8", 1);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_vig_sblk_0 = _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE(2);
+static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_dma_sblk_0 = _DMA_SBLK(1);
/*************************************************************
   * MIXER sub blocks config


--
With best wishes
Dmitry




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux