From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915/cdclk: un-inline intel_cdclk_state functions
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:54:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YbJC6UHlcyt9s7tt@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66f687db7321846049a6aa524dfafd45cf0cb77f.1639068649.git.jani.nikula@intel.com>
On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 06:51:23PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Hide the details better.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.h | 13 ++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
> index a216a350006d..84674a4f7226 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.c
> @@ -2630,6 +2630,24 @@ intel_atomic_get_cdclk_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> return to_intel_cdclk_state(cdclk_state);
> }
>
> +struct intel_cdclk_state *
> +to_intel_cdclk_state(struct intel_global_state *cdclk_state)
> +{
> + return container_of(cdclk_state, struct intel_cdclk_state, base);
> +}
> +
> +struct intel_cdclk_state *
> +intel_atomic_get_old_cdclk_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> +{
> + return to_intel_cdclk_state(intel_atomic_get_old_global_obj_state(state, &to_i915(state->base.dev)->cdclk.obj));
> +}
> +
> +struct intel_cdclk_state *
> +intel_atomic_get_new_cdclk_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state)
> +{
> + return to_intel_cdclk_state(intel_atomic_get_new_global_obj_state(state, &to_i915(state->base.dev)->cdclk.obj));
> +}
> +
Not really sure about this one. We don't do this for any other similar
cases, and I think the macro versions are needed if we have any kind of
const vs. non-const funny business going on. I guess in this particular
case we don't, but pretty sure that was a real thing for some other
atomic states when I was pondering about using functions rather than
macros for those.
So I'm tempted to say we should stick to a common pattern across the
board if possible.
> int intel_cdclk_atomic_check(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> bool *need_cdclk_calc)
> {
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.h
> index bb3a778c506b..77e8c8e1708f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cdclk.h
> @@ -76,11 +76,14 @@ int intel_cdclk_atomic_check(struct intel_atomic_state *state,
> struct intel_cdclk_state *
> intel_atomic_get_cdclk_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state);
>
> -#define to_intel_cdclk_state(x) container_of((x), struct intel_cdclk_state, base)
> -#define intel_atomic_get_old_cdclk_state(state) \
> - to_intel_cdclk_state(intel_atomic_get_old_global_obj_state(state, &to_i915(state->base.dev)->cdclk.obj))
> -#define intel_atomic_get_new_cdclk_state(state) \
> - to_intel_cdclk_state(intel_atomic_get_new_global_obj_state(state, &to_i915(state->base.dev)->cdclk.obj))
> +struct intel_cdclk_state *
> +to_intel_cdclk_state(struct intel_global_state *cdclk_state);
> +
> +struct intel_cdclk_state *
> +intel_atomic_get_old_cdclk_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state);
> +
> +struct intel_cdclk_state *
> +intel_atomic_get_new_cdclk_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state);
>
> int intel_cdclk_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv);
>
> --
> 2.30.2
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-09 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-09 16:51 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] drm/i915/cdclk: improve abstractions Jani Nikula
2021-12-09 16:51 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/4] drm/i915/cdclk: move intel_atomic_check_cdclk() to intel_cdclk.c Jani Nikula
2021-12-09 17:45 ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-12-09 16:51 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915/cdclk: un-inline intel_cdclk_state functions Jani Nikula
2021-12-09 17:54 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2021-12-09 18:38 ` Jani Nikula
2021-12-09 16:51 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915/cdclk: hide struct intel_cdclk_vals Jani Nikula
2021-12-09 17:46 ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-12-09 16:51 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/cdclk: turn around i915_drv.h and intel_cdclk.h dependency Jani Nikula
2021-12-09 17:55 ` Ville Syrjälä
2021-12-09 17:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] drm/i915/cdclk: improve abstractions Ville Syrjälä
2021-12-10 4:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2021-12-10 4:01 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-12-10 4:30 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-12-10 15:03 ` [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=YbJC6UHlcyt9s7tt@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@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