Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] drm/i915/display: Cleanup mplla/mpllb selection

[Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>]

On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 01:57:41PM +0200, Mika Kahola wrote:
> The function intel_c20_use_mplla() is not really
> widely used and can be replaced with the more suitable
> 
> pll->tx[0] & C20_PHY_USE_MPLLB
> 
> expression. Let's remove the intel_c20_use_mplla()
> alltogether and replace mplla/mpllb selection by
> checking mpllb bit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mika Kahola <mika.kahola@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cx0_phy.c | 39 ++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cx0_phy.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cx0_phy.c
> index fc7211675b2f..d0b6b4e439e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cx0_phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_cx0_phy.c
> @@ -2096,15 +2096,6 @@ int intel_cx0pll_calc_state(struct intel_crtc_state *crtc_state,
>  	return intel_c20pll_calc_state(crtc_state, encoder);
>  }
>  
> -static bool intel_c20_use_mplla(u32 clock)
> -{
> -	/* 10G and 20G rates use MPLLA */
> -	if (clock == 1000000 || clock == 2000000)
> -		return true;
> -
> -	return false;
> -}
> -
>  static int intel_c20pll_calc_port_clock(struct intel_encoder *encoder,
>  					const struct intel_c20pll_state *pll_state)
>  {
> @@ -2221,12 +2212,12 @@ void intel_c20pll_dump_hw_state(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  	drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "cmn[0] = 0x%.4x, cmn[1] = 0x%.4x, cmn[2] = 0x%.4x, cmn[3] = 0x%.4x\n",
>  		    hw_state->cmn[0], hw_state->cmn[1], hw_state->cmn[2], hw_state->cmn[3]);
>  
> -	if (intel_c20_use_mplla(hw_state->clock)) {
> -		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(hw_state->mplla); i++)
> -			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "mplla[%d] = 0x%.4x\n", i, hw_state->mplla[i]);
> -	} else {
> +	if (hw_state->tx[0] & C20_PHY_USE_MPLLB) {

The above could be in a helper.

>  		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(hw_state->mpllb); i++)
>  			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "mpllb[%d] = 0x%.4x\n", i, hw_state->mpllb[i]);
> +	} else {
> +		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(hw_state->mplla); i++)
> +			drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm, "mplla[%d] = 0x%.4x\n", i, hw_state->mplla[i]);
>  	}
>  }
>  
> @@ -2373,27 +2364,27 @@ static void intel_c20_pll_program(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>  	}
>  
>  	/* 3.3 mpllb or mplla configuration */
> -	if (intel_c20_use_mplla(clock)) {
> -		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pll_state->mplla); i++) {
> +	if (pll_state->tx[0] & C20_PHY_USE_MPLLB) {
> +		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pll_state->mpllb); i++) {
>  			if (cntx)
>  				intel_c20_sram_write(i915, encoder->port, INTEL_CX0_LANE0,
> -						     PHY_C20_A_MPLLA_CNTX_CFG(i),
> -						     pll_state->mplla[i]);
> +						     PHY_C20_A_MPLLB_CNTX_CFG(i),
> +						     pll_state->mpllb[i]);

Imo, at one point intel_c20pll_state should be converted to use only one
mpll array instead of mplla/b and define a PHY_C20_MPLL_CNTX_CFG(cntx, pll, idx)
macro instead of the above ones.

The patchset looks ok:
Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>

>  			else
>  				intel_c20_sram_write(i915, encoder->port, INTEL_CX0_LANE0,
> -						     PHY_C20_B_MPLLA_CNTX_CFG(i),
> -						     pll_state->mplla[i]);
> +						     PHY_C20_B_MPLLB_CNTX_CFG(i),
> +						     pll_state->mpllb[i]);
>  		}
>  	} else {
> -		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pll_state->mpllb); i++) {
> +		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pll_state->mplla); i++) {
>  			if (cntx)
>  				intel_c20_sram_write(i915, encoder->port, INTEL_CX0_LANE0,
> -						     PHY_C20_A_MPLLB_CNTX_CFG(i),
> -						     pll_state->mpllb[i]);
> +						     PHY_C20_A_MPLLA_CNTX_CFG(i),
> +						     pll_state->mplla[i]);
>  			else
>  				intel_c20_sram_write(i915, encoder->port, INTEL_CX0_LANE0,
> -						     PHY_C20_B_MPLLB_CNTX_CFG(i),
> -						     pll_state->mpllb[i]);
> +						     PHY_C20_B_MPLLA_CNTX_CFG(i),
> +						     pll_state->mplla[i]);
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>