Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 05/19] drm/i915/dsb: Define the contents of some intstructions bit better

["Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 08:50:24PM +0000, Shankar, Uma wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Ville
> > Syrjala
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2023 12:45 AM
> > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 05/19] drm/i915/dsb: Define the contents of some
> > intstructions bit better
> > 
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Add some defines to specify what goes inside certain DSB instructions.
> 
> Only upper and lower shift seems to be added in the patch, do we need a
> separate patch for this or we can squash with where its used.
> Will leave the decision to you.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c | 12 ++++++++----
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> > index 42911abcd3ab..093b2567883d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsb.c
> > @@ -70,17 +70,21 @@ struct intel_dsb {
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_SHIFT		24
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_NOOP			0x0
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_MMIO_WRITE		0x1
> > +#define   DSB_BYTE_EN			0xf
> > +#define   DSB_BYTE_EN_SHIFT		20
> > +#define   DSB_REG_VALUE_MASK		0xfffff
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_USEC		0x2
> > -#define DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_LINES		0x3
> > +#define DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_SCANLINE	0x3
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_VBLANKS		0x4
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_DSL_IN		0x5
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_WAIT_DSL_OUT		0x6
> > +#define   DSB_SCANLINE_UPPER_SHIFT	20
> > +#define   DSB_SCANLINE_LOWER_SHIFT	0
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_INTERRUPT		0x7	
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_INDEXED_WRITE	0x9
> > +/* see DSB_REG_VALUE_MASK */
> >  #define DSB_OPCODE_POLL			0xA
> > -#define DSB_BYTE_EN			0xF
> > -#define DSB_BYTE_EN_SHIFT		20
> > -#define DSB_REG_VALUE_MASK		0xfffff
> > +/* see DSB_REG_VALUE_MASK */
> 
> This comment seems redundant. With this fixed,

The comment indicates that DSB_OPCODE_POLL also uses DSB_REG_VALUE_MASK,
similar to DSB_OPCODE_INDEXED_WRITE.

> Reviewed-by: Uma Shankar <uma.shankar@intel.com>
> 
> > 
> >  static bool assert_dsb_has_room(struct intel_dsb *dsb)  {
> > --
> > 2.39.3
> 

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel