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
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
ILK is the only platform that we consider "gen5" and SNB is the only
platform we consider "gen6." Add an IS_SANDYBRIDGE() macro and then
replace numeric platform tests for these two generations with direct
platform tests with the following Coccinelle semantic patch:
@@ expression dev_priv; @@
- IS_GEN(dev_priv, 5)
+ IS_IRONLAKE(dev_priv)
@@ expression dev_priv; @@
- IS_GEN(dev_priv, 6)
+ IS_SANDYBRIDGE(dev_priv)
@@ expression dev_priv; @@
- IS_GEN_RANGE(dev_priv, 5, 6)
+ IS_IRONLAKE(dev_priv) || IS_SANDYBRIDGE(dev_priv)
This will simplify our upcoming patches which eliminate INTEL_GEN()
usage in the display code.
v2:
- Reverse ilk/snb order for IS_GEN_RANGE conversion. (Ville)
- Rebase + regenerate from semantic patch
Signed-off-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210320044245.3920043-2-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
