From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jindal, Sonika" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] drm: Renaming DP training vswing pre emph defines Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:01:04 +0530 Message-ID: <53FD5F08.4090406@intel.com> References: <1407495226-12620-1-git-send-email-sonika.jindal@intel.com> <1407495226-12620-2-git-send-email-sonika.jindal@intel.com> <20140826112818.GA31534@ulmo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140826112818.GA31534@ulmo> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Thierry Reding Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On 8/26/2014 4:58 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 04:23:40PM +0530, sonika.jindal@intel.com wrote: >> From: Sonika Jindal >> >> Adding new defines, older one will be removed in the last patch in the series. >> This is to rename the defines to have levels instead of values for vswing and >> pre-emph levels as the values may differ in other scenarios like low vswing of >> eDP1.4 where the values are different. >> >> Done using following cocci patch for each define: >> @@ >> @@ >> >> # define DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_400 (0 << 0) >> + # define DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING_LEVEL_0 (0 << 0) > > Could this perhaps be simply: > > #define DP_TRAIN_VOLTAGE_SWING(x) ((x) << 0) > > As it is, there's no information about the value within the symbolic > name anyway, so _LEVEL_* really isn't that useful and keeping several > macros for each value seems isn't either. > I feel _LEVEL_* makes it more readable and since there are only 4 values possible, it is ok to have 4 different macros for readability purpose. What do you think? > An alternative would be to provide a second set of defines for eDP 1.4 > where the name implies the meaning and then use them as appropriate. > > Thierry >