Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/skl: Buffer translation improvements

David Weinehall
2015-06-23T10:29:50Z

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:59:34AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:47:30PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote:
> > > > +static const struct ddi_buf_trans *skl_get_buf_trans_dp(struct drm_device *dev,
> > >
> > > struct drm_i915_private not struct drm_device!
> >
> > The device uses both dev and dev_priv; only passing in
> > drm_i915_private wouldn't provide access to dev,
> > or am I missing something?
>
> Hmm, Oh, you didn't set bits in intel_info for ult/ulx. Instead you have
> large if chains hidden in macros.
>
> So another task is to translate IS_*_UL? over to using a field in
> intel_info to reduce the code size (at the expense of more intel_info
> data).
>
> #define IS_SKL_ULT(P) (IS_SKL(P) && INTEL_INFO(P)->is_ult)
> #define IS_SKL_ULX(P) (IS_SKL(P) && INTEL_INFO(P)->is_ulx)

I just followed the pattern of the existing IS_xxx_yyy macros.
Cleanup sounds sensible; this patch merely aims to add a missing
feature.

Kind regards, David