IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Hoist the intel_de.h include from intel_display_types.h one
level up. I need this in order to untangle the include order
so that I can add tracepoints into intel_de.h.
This little cocci script did most of the work for me:
@find@
@@
(
intel_de_read(...)
|
intel_de_read_fw(...)
|
intel_de_write(...)
|
intel_de_write_fw(...)
)
@has_include@
@@
(
#include "intel_de.h"
|
#include "display/intel_de.h"
)
@depends on find && !has_include@
@@
+ #include "intel_de.h"
#include "intel_display_types.h"
@depends on find && !has_include@
@@
+ #include "display/intel_de.h"
#include "display/intel_display_types.h"
Cc: Cooper Chiou <cooper.chiou@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210430143945.6776-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
While converting the rest of the driver to use GRAPHICS_VER() and
MEDIA_VER(), following what was done for display, some discussions went
back on what we did for display:
1) Why is the == comparison special that deserves a separate
macro instead of just getting the version and comparing directly
like is done for >, >=, <=?
2) IS_DISPLAY_RANGE() is weird in that it omits the "_VER" for
brevity. If we remove the current users of IS_DISPLAY_VER(), we
could actually repurpose it for a range check
With (1) there could be an advantage if we used gen_mask since multiple
conditionals be combined by the compiler in a single and instruction and
check the result. However a) INTEL_GEN() doesn't use the mask since it
would make the code bigger everywhere else and b) in the cases it made
sense, it also made sense to convert to the _RANGE() variant.
So here we repurpose IS_DISPLAY_VER() to work with a [ from, to ] range
like was the IS_DISPLAY_RANGE() and convert the current IS_DISPLAY_VER()
users to use == and != operators. Aside from the definition changes,
this was done by the following semantic patch:
@@ expression dev_priv, E1; @@
- !IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E1)
+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) != E1
@@ expression dev_priv, E1; @@
- IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E1)
+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv) == E1
@@ expression dev_priv, from, until; @@
- IS_DISPLAY_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, from, until)
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
[Jani: Minor conflict resolve while applying.]
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210413051002.92589-4-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
Now that we've eliminated INTEL_GEN(), IS_GEN_RANGE(), etc. from the
display code, we should also kill off our use of the IS_GEN9_* macros
too. We'll do the conversion manually this time instead of using
Coccinelle since the most logical substitution can depend heavily on the
code context, and sometimes we can keep the code simpler if we make
additional adjustments such as swapping the order of if/else arms.
v2:
- Restore a lost negation in intel_pll_is_valid().
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Radhakrishna Sripada <radhakrishna.sripada@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210407203945.1432531-1-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
(cherry picked from commit 70bfb30743d5da73058b0a2271e9c127a84fb494)
[Jani: cherry picked to topic branch to reduce conflicts]
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Use Coccinelle to convert most of the usage of INTEL_GEN() and IS_GEN()
in the display code to use DISPLAY_VER() comparisons instead. The
following semantic patch was used:
@@ expression dev_priv, E; @@
- INTEL_GEN(dev_priv) == E
+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E)
@@ expression dev_priv; @@
- INTEL_GEN(dev_priv)
+ DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv)
@@ expression dev_priv; expression E; @@
- IS_GEN(dev_priv, E)
+ IS_DISPLAY_VER(dev_priv, E)
@@
expression dev_priv;
expression from, until;
@@
- IS_GEN_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
+ IS_DISPLAY_RANGE(dev_priv, from, until)
There are still some display-related uses of INTEL_GEN() in intel_pm.c
(watermark code) and i915_irq.c. Those will be updated separately.
v2:
- Use new IS_DISPLAY_RANGE and IS_DISPLAY_VER helpers. (Jani)
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210320044245.3920043-4-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
This pulls a large chunk of the pll calculation code out of
intel_display.c to a new file.
One function makes sense to be an inline, otherwise this
is pretty much a straight copy cover. Also all the
remaining hooks for g45 and older end up the same now.
Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
[Jani: cleaned up intel_dpll.h a bit, de-duped intel_panel_use_ssc().]
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/74b58e0572858b5d1734818ca594a23040d7d44f.1610622609.git.jani.nikula@intel.com
