From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] v4l: vsp1: Move DRM pipeline output setup code to a function
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 00:05:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2064092.kPXj3Peec5@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a4f5fd1-4345-5f74-2a10-dadd0e1ba130@ideasonboard.com>
Hi Kieran,
On Wednesday, 4 April 2018 19:15:19 EEST Kieran Bingham wrote:
> On 02/04/18 13:35, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >>> +/* Setup the output side of the pipeline (WPF and LIF). */
> >>> +static int vsp1_du_pipeline_setup_output(struct vsp1_device *vsp1,
> >>> + struct vsp1_pipeline *pipe)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct vsp1_drm_pipeline *drm_pipe = to_vsp1_drm_pipeline(pipe);
> >>> + struct v4l2_subdev_format format = {
> >>> + .which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE,
> >>
> >> Why do you initialise this .which here, but all the other member
> >> variables below.
> >>
> >> Wouldn't it make more sense to group all of this initialisation together?
> >> or is there a distinction in keeping the .which separate.
> >>
> >> (Perhaps this is just a way to initialise the rest of the structure to 0,
> >> without using the memset?)
> >
> > The initialization of the .which field is indeed there to avoid the
> > memset, but other than that there's no particular reason. I find it
> > clearer to keep the initialization of the structure close to the code that
> > makes use of it (the next v4l2_subdev_call in this case).
> >
> > As initializing all members when declaring the variable doesn't make a
> > change in code size (gcc 6.4.0) but increases .rodata by 18 bytes and
> > decreases __modver by the same amount, I'm tempted to leave it as-is
> > unless you think it should be changed.
>
> I'm happy to leave it as is - the query was as much to understand why the
> change was the way it was :D
>
> But on that logic (reducing .rodata, or rather not increasing it) what's the
> benefit of initialising with one (random/psuedo random) member variable
> over initialising to all zero, then initialising the .which alongside the
> rest of them? Wouldn't the compiler just use the zero page or such to
> initialise then?
I've just tested that, and it seems to generate the exact same code. I'll
initialize the structure to 0 when declaring it and move the which field
initialization with the other fields.
> This way is fine if you are happy with how it reads :D
>
> >>> + };
> >>> + int ret;
> >>> +
> >>> + format.pad = RWPF_PAD_SINK;
> >>> + format.format.width = drm_pipe->width;
> >>> + format.format.height = drm_pipe->height;
> >>> + format.format.code = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_ARGB8888_1X32;
> >>> + format.format.field = V4L2_FIELD_NONE;
> >>> +
> >>> + ret = v4l2_subdev_call(&pipe->output->entity.subdev, pad, set_fmt,
> >
> > NULL,
> >
> >>> + &format);
> >>> + if (ret < 0)
> >>> + return ret;
> >>> +
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] v4l: vsp1: Move DRM pipeline output setup code to a function
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 00:05:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2064092.kPXj3Peec5@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a4f5fd1-4345-5f74-2a10-dadd0e1ba130@ideasonboard.com>
Hi Kieran,
On Wednesday, 4 April 2018 19:15:19 EEST Kieran Bingham wrote:
> On 02/04/18 13:35, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >>> +/* Setup the output side of the pipeline (WPF and LIF). */
> >>> +static int vsp1_du_pipeline_setup_output(struct vsp1_device *vsp1,
> >>> + struct vsp1_pipeline *pipe)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct vsp1_drm_pipeline *drm_pipe = to_vsp1_drm_pipeline(pipe);
> >>> + struct v4l2_subdev_format format = {
> >>> + .which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE,
> >>
> >> Why do you initialise this .which here, but all the other member
> >> variables below.
> >>
> >> Wouldn't it make more sense to group all of this initialisation together?
> >> or is there a distinction in keeping the .which separate.
> >>
> >> (Perhaps this is just a way to initialise the rest of the structure to 0,
> >> without using the memset?)
> >
> > The initialization of the .which field is indeed there to avoid the
> > memset, but other than that there's no particular reason. I find it
> > clearer to keep the initialization of the structure close to the code that
> > makes use of it (the next v4l2_subdev_call in this case).
> >
> > As initializing all members when declaring the variable doesn't make a
> > change in code size (gcc 6.4.0) but increases .rodata by 18 bytes and
> > decreases __modver by the same amount, I'm tempted to leave it as-is
> > unless you think it should be changed.
>
> I'm happy to leave it as is - the query was as much to understand why the
> change was the way it was :D
>
> But on that logic (reducing .rodata, or rather not increasing it) what's the
> benefit of initialising with one (random/psuedo random) member variable
> over initialising to all zero, then initialising the .which alongside the
> rest of them? Wouldn't the compiler just use the zero page or such to
> initialise then?
I've just tested that, and it seems to generate the exact same code. I'll
initialize the structure to 0 when declaring it and move the which field
initialization with the other fields.
> This way is fine if you are happy with how it reads :D
>
> >>> + };
> >>> + int ret;
> >>> +
> >>> + format.pad = RWPF_PAD_SINK;
> >>> + format.format.width = drm_pipe->width;
> >>> + format.format.height = drm_pipe->height;
> >>> + format.format.code = MEDIA_BUS_FMT_ARGB8888_1X32;
> >>> + format.format.field = V4L2_FIELD_NONE;
> >>> +
> >>> + ret = v4l2_subdev_call(&pipe->output->entity.subdev, pad, set_fmt,
> >
> > NULL,
> >
> >>> + &format);
> >>> + if (ret < 0)
> >>> + return ret;
> >>> +
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-04 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-26 21:45 [PATCH 00/15] R-Car VSP1: Dynamically assign blend units to display pipelines Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 01/15] v4l: vsp1: Don't start/stop media pipeline for DRM Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 15:35 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 15:35 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 02/15] v4l: vsp1: Remove outdated comment Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-27 8:22 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2018-02-27 8:22 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2018-02-27 9:14 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-27 9:14 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 12:27 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 12:27 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 19:04 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 19:04 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-29 6:51 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-29 6:51 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 03/15] v4l: vsp1: Remove unused field from vsp1_drm_pipeline structure Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 12:31 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 12:31 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 04/15] v4l: vsp1: Store pipeline pointer in vsp1_entity Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 13:46 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 13:46 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 05/15] v4l: vsp1: Use vsp1_entity.pipe to check if entity belongs to a pipeline Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 14:10 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 14:10 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-29 7:00 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-29 7:00 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 06/15] v4l: vsp1: Share duplicated DRM pipeline configuration code Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 14:25 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 14:25 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 07/15] v4l: vsp1: Move DRM atomic commit pipeline setup to separate function Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 14:43 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 14:43 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-29 7:08 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-29 7:08 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 08/15] v4l: vsp1: Setup BRU at atomic commit time Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 19:01 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 19:01 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 09/15] v4l: vsp1: Replace manual DRM pipeline input setup in vsp1_du_setup_lif Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-28 15:01 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-28 15:01 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 10/15] v4l: vsp1: Move DRM pipeline output setup code to a function Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-29 11:49 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-29 11:49 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-02 12:35 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-02 12:35 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 16:15 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 16:15 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 21:05 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2018-04-04 21:05 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 11/15] v4l: vsp1: Add per-display list completion notification support Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 16:16 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 16:16 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 21:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 21:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-05 8:46 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-05 8:46 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 12/15] v4l: vsp1: Generalize detection of entity removal from DRM pipeline Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-03-29 11:37 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-03-29 11:37 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-02 12:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-02 12:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 13/15] v4l: vsp1: Assign BRU and BRS to pipelines dynamically Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 16:00 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 16:00 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 21:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 21:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 14/15] v4l: vsp1: Add BRx dynamic assignment debugging messages Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 16:17 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 16:17 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-02-26 21:45 ` [PATCH 15/15] v4l: vsp1: Rename BRU to BRx Laurent Pinchart
2018-02-26 21:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2018-04-04 16:23 ` Kieran Bingham
2018-04-04 16:23 ` Kieran Bingham
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2064092.kPXj3Peec5@avalon \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.