On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:03:52PM -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
On Thu, 2018-11-29 at 18:25 -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
- Reusing the EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_SHIFT in
EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU
- Removing unused EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_MASK
- Adding EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_MAX
- Adding EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME()
- Adding EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME_MAX
In the next patch the new macros will be used.
Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com Cc: Rodrigo Vivi rodrigo.vivi@intel.com Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza jose.souza@intel.com
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h index d3ef97915455..9e46da5032c0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h @@ -4216,10 +4216,11 @@ enum { #define EDP_PSR2_TP2_TIME_50us (3 << 8) #define EDP_PSR2_TP2_TIME_MASK (3 << 8) #define EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_SHIFT 4 -#define EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_MASK (0xf << 4)
_MASKs are useful when we want to read back the register for debugging. So, I'm not fully convinced this is an improvement.
Rodrigo, your thoughts on this?
I agree with DK.
But I also don't mind removing if we aren't using.
-#define EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU(a) ((a) << 4) -#define EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME_MASK 0xf +#define EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_MAX 0xf +#define EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU(a) ((a) << EDP_PSR2_FRAME_BEFORE_SU_SHIFT) #define EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME_SHIFT 0 +#define EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME_MAX 0xf
Not sure if this is better than re-using _MASK here. I'm sure there are places in the driver where we already do that.
I think it depends on the use actually...
+#define EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME(a) ((a) << EDP_PSR2_IDLE_FRAME_SHIFT)
#define _PSR_EVENT_TRANS_A 0x60848 #define _PSR_EVENT_TRANS_B 0x61848
Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx