Hi Laurent,
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 05:31:05PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
- if (mipi_dsi_packet_format_is_short(msg->type)) {
u16 data = packet.header[1] | (packet.header[2] << 8);r = dsi_vc_send_short(dsi, msg->channel, msg->type, data, 0);You use the packet for this case only, I think you could simply write
u16 data = ((msg->tx_len > 0) ? tx[0] : 0) | (((msg->tx_len > 1) ? tx[1] : 0) << 8); r = dsi_vc_send_short(dsi, msg->channel, msg->type, data, 0);
That probably works with 's/tx[/((u8*) msg->tx_buf)[', which looks really ugly :) This code is further simplified by a further patch, which forwards the complete message into dsi_vc_send_short().
} else {
r = dsi_vc_send_long(dsi, channel,type == DSS_DSI_CONTENT_GENERIC ?MIPI_DSI_GENERIC_LONG_WRITE :MIPI_DSI_DCS_LONG_WRITE, data, len, 0);
r = dsi_vc_send_long(dsi, msg->channel, msg->type,msg->tx_buf, msg->tx_len, 0);Indentation.
Ok.
Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com
Are you fine with keeping the mipi_dsi_packet, since it will be removed in a further patch?
}
- return r;
-}
-static int dsi_vc_dcs_write_nosync(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev, int channel,
const u8 *data, int len)-{
- struct dsi_data *dsi = to_dsi_data(dssdev);
- return dsi_vc_write_nosync_common(dsi, channel, data, len,
DSS_DSI_CONTENT_DCS);-}
-static int dsi_vc_generic_write_nosync(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev, int channel,
const u8 *data, int len)-{
- struct dsi_data *dsi = to_dsi_data(dssdev);
- return dsi_vc_write_nosync_common(dsi, channel, data, len,
DSS_DSI_CONTENT_GENERIC);-}
-static int dsi_vc_write_common(struct omap_dss_device *dssdev,
int channel, const u8 *data, int len,enum dss_dsi_content_type type)-{
- struct dsi_data *dsi = to_dsi_data(dssdev);
- int r;
- if (r < 0)
return r;
- r = dsi_vc_write_nosync_common(dsi, channel, data, len, type);
- if (r)
goto err;
- /*
* we do not always have to do the BTA sync, for example we can* improve performance by setting the update window information* without sending BTA sync between the commands. In that case* we can return earily.s/earily/early/
Do I understand correctly that this isn't implemented yet ? You should make it clear in the comment that it's a candidate for a future optimization.
Yes. I forgot the TODO keyword for some reason. Has been quite some time since I wrote this patch :) I fixed the earily and prefixed the message with TODO.
-- Sebastian