Re: [PATCH 03/11] drm/i915: Rename and comment all the RPS *stuff*

Ben Widawsky
2014-03-19T01:27:19Z

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 01:37:16PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 07:01:44PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > The names of the struct members for RPS are stupid. Every time I need to
> > do anything in this code I have to spend a significant amount of time to
> > remember what it all means. By renaming the variables (and adding the
> > comments) I hope to clear up the situation. Indeed doing this make some
> > upcoming patches more readable.
> >
> > I've avoided ILK because it's possible that the naming used for Ironlake
> > matches what is in the docs. I believe the ILK power docs were never
> > published, and I am too lazy to dig them up.
> >
> > While there may be mistakes, this patch was mostly done via sed. The
> > renaming of "hw_max" required a bit of interactivity.
>
> It lost the distinction between RPe and RPn. I am in favour of keeping
> RP0, RP1, RPe, RPn for the hardware/spec values and adding the set of
> soft values used for actual interaction.
> -Chris
>

Okay, as stated before, you are correct - I need to bring back RPe/RPn
distinction. I think using the mix of values (basically s/_delay/_freq)
doesn't fully relize what I was hoping to achieve. I don't think there
is ever a case, except when debugging where it's easier to refer to the
RP mnemonic. How strongly do you feel about this one? I'd really prefer
to just fix RPe/RPn.

Does anyone else have an opinion on:
"max_freq_hardlimit" vs. "rp0"

Does anyone else want to review this one?

> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center