public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/12] drm/i915: Simplify watermark state checker calling convention
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2023 19:57:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877co2e36j.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231004155607.7719-7-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

On Wed, 04 Oct 2023, Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>
> There is never any reason to pass in both the crtc and its state
> as one can always dig out the crtc from its state.

I'm wondering whether we shouldn't just always pass 

struct intel_atomic_state *state, struct intel_crtc *crtc

to the checker, everywhere, even if that's excessive in some cases. I
think some of the confusion you're fixing in this series comes from
people cargo culting the conventions, and then adding some new
parameters as needed, deviating from the state, crtc pair.

>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c | 2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c        | 4 ++--
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.h        | 3 +--
>  3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c
> index 47d45ba1e707..bbee79aad0cd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c
> @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ void intel_modeset_verify_crtc(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
>  	    !intel_crtc_needs_fastset(new_crtc_state))
>  		return;
>  
> -	intel_wm_state_verify(crtc, new_crtc_state);
> +	intel_wm_state_verify(new_crtc_state);
>  	verify_connector_state(state, crtc);
>  	verify_crtc_state(state, crtc);
>  	intel_shared_dpll_state_verify(state, crtc);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> index d51cf92c96ae..e7a9fb4b1f6b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.c
> @@ -3134,9 +3134,9 @@ static void skl_wm_get_hw_state_and_sanitize(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>  	skl_wm_sanitize(i915);
>  }
>  
> -void intel_wm_state_verify(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> -			   const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
> +void intel_wm_state_verify(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state)
>  {
> +	struct intel_crtc *crtc = to_intel_crtc(new_crtc_state->uapi.crtc);
>  	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(crtc->base.dev);
>  	struct skl_hw_state {
>  		struct skl_ddb_entry ddb[I915_MAX_PLANES];
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.h
> index 18e4b0661cbb..ca4312bf7012 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/skl_watermark.h
> @@ -38,8 +38,7 @@ bool skl_ddb_allocation_overlaps(const struct skl_ddb_entry *ddb,
>  				 const struct skl_ddb_entry *entries,
>  				 int num_entries, int ignore_idx);
>  
> -void intel_wm_state_verify(struct intel_crtc *crtc,
> -			   const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state);
> +void intel_wm_state_verify(const struct intel_crtc_state *new_crtc_state);
>  
>  void skl_watermark_ipc_init(struct drm_i915_private *i915);
>  void skl_watermark_ipc_update(struct drm_i915_private *i915);

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-04 16:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-04 15:55 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/12] drm/i915: Display state checker cleanup Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:55 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/12] drm/i915/psr: Unify PSR pre/post plane update hooks Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:55 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 02/12] drm/i915: Stop clobbering old crtc state during state check Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:55 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 03/12] drm/i915: Constify the crtc states in the DPLL checker Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:55 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 04/12] drm/i915: Simplify DPLL state checker calling convention Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/12] drm/i915: Constify watermark state checker Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/12] drm/i915: Simplify watermark state checker calling convention Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 16:57   ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2023-10-04 17:18     ` Ville Syrjälä
2023-10-05 12:27   ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 " Ville Syrjala
2023-10-05 13:08     ` Jani Nikula
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/12] drm/i915: Constify the snps/c10x PLL state checkers Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/12] drm/i915: Simplify snps/c10x DPLL state checker calling convetion Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/12] drm/i915: Constify remainder of the state checker Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 10/12] drm/i915: Simplify the state checker calling convetions Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 11/12] drm/i915: s/pipe_config/crtc_state/ in the state checker Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 15:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 12/12] drm/i915: s/dev_priv/i915/ " Ville Syrjala
2023-10-04 16:58 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/12] drm/i915: Display state checker cleanup Jani Nikula
2023-10-04 22:45 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2023-10-04 22:45 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-10-04 23:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2023-10-05  3:28 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Display state checker cleanup (rev2) Patchwork
2023-10-05  3:28 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-10-05  3:42 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2023-10-05 23:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Display state checker cleanup (rev3) Patchwork
2023-10-05 23:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-10-05 23:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2023-10-06 13:19 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=877co2e36j.fsf@intel.com \
    --to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox