From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/21] drm/i915: introduce lpt_enable_pch
 and cpt_enable_pch
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 17:47:18 -0300
Message-ID: <4FF74ED6.7030408@linux.intel.com>
References: <1340909749-15249-1-git-send-email-eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
	<1340909749-15249-11-git-send-email-eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
	<CA+gsUGTv3fK6zUGp7dUafdOc9nvZXN0RoC1WwSox0nnWucKrUw@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: eugeni.dodonov@intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 330A69E74D
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri,  6 Jul 2012 13:45:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+gsUGTv3fK6zUGp7dUafdOc9nvZXN0RoC1WwSox0nnWucKrUw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Paulo Zanoni <przanoni@gmail.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni.dodonov@intel.com>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On 07/04/2012 03:21 PM, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> It looks like the check above could go on a separate commit. The first
> commit just moves code around, the second one adds the check.

This patch attempts to reset cpt_pch_enable to what ironlake_pch_enable
was before we added LPT support into it; and make lpt_pch_enable account
for LPT checks and such.

But yes, I can split it into several commits.

> I may have misunderstood something about this code which is not
> familiar to me, but instead of limiting everything to pipe 0, can't we
> just iterate through all pipes, read DDI_FUNC_CTL(pipe) and see if
> there's any other enabled pipe on FDI mode?

Yes, the idea in those asserts and checks was that as only 1 pipe can
work in FDI mode, and as we only have 1 FDI RX, 1 PCH Transcoder and so
on, we simple forced pipe1 to work in this mode, as this way most of
older code which uses macros still works.

But there is certainly a room for improvements.

>> -static void ironlake_pch_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
>> +static void cpt_pch_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
> 
> Since this will run on both IBX and CPT, shouldn't we call it
> ibx_pch_enable? At least on intel_hdmi.c, the functions are named
> after the earliest generation that can run them.

Yes, I can rename it to ibx_pch_enable.

I'll do those changes and split this one into smaller commits and will
resend later.

Thanks!
Eugeni