On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 11:52 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 September 2012 08:03 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 11:49 +0530, Archit Taneja wrote:
> >> Writeback uses the WB_PICTURE_SIZE register to define the size of the content
> >> written to memory, this is the output of the scaler. It uses the WB_SIZE
> >> register to define the size of the content coming from the overlay/manager to
> >> which it is connected, this is the input to the scaler. This naming is different
> >> as compared to overlays.
> >>
> >> Add checks for writeback in dispc_ovl_set_input_size() and
> >> dispc_ovl_set_output_size() to write to the correct registers.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Archit Taneja <archit@xxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c | 7 +++++--
> >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c
> >> index e42e902..04fdd33 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/video/omap2/dss/dispc.c
> >> @@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ static void dispc_ovl_set_input_size(enum omap_plane plane, int width,
> >> {
> >> u32 val = FLD_VAL(height - 1, 26, 16) | FLD_VAL(width - 1, 10, 0);
> >>
> >> - if (plane == OMAP_DSS_GFX)
> >> + if (plane == OMAP_DSS_GFX || plane == OMAP_DSS_WB)
> >> dispc_write_reg(DISPC_OVL_SIZE(plane), val);
> >> else
> >> dispc_write_reg(DISPC_OVL_PICTURE_SIZE(plane), val);
> >> @@ -734,7 +734,10 @@ static void dispc_ovl_set_output_size(enum omap_plane plane, int width,
> >>
> >> val = FLD_VAL(height - 1, 26, 16) | FLD_VAL(width - 1, 10, 0);
> >>
> >> - dispc_write_reg(DISPC_OVL_SIZE(plane), val);
> >> + if (plane == OMAP_DSS_WB)
> >> + dispc_write_reg(DISPC_OVL_PICTURE_SIZE(plane), val);
> >> + else
> >> + dispc_write_reg(DISPC_OVL_SIZE(plane), val);
> >> }
> >
> > Should we just rename the dispc registers to DISPC_OVL_IN_SIZE and
> > DISPC_OVL_OUT_SIZE, and then we could do without the ifs? The registers
> > have always confused me a bit, I don't know why they are named so in the
> > TRM.
>
> It'll be hard for someone who's referring to the TRM in that case. It'll
> also be hard to track reg dumps if these names change. I think we should
> stick to the TRM names only.
Generally speaking I agree.
However, with each new OMAP we get register name changes. We already
have at least a few of those, and I think it'll just get worse. So at
some point we'll have a mishmash of register names from different omap
versions, or we'll rename the registers according to one particular omap
version (probably the latest one), or we'll name the registers as seems
best for the driver.
But yes, perhaps it's still best to keep the reg names as they are.
Perhaps there's even a logic with the names, I just can't see it =).
Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
