From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84AC3D2ECEF for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2026 22:57:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA1510E26D; Mon, 19 Jan 2026 22:57:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="cj07FLmR"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.18]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C750410E22E; Mon, 19 Jan 2026 22:57:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1768863474; x=1800399474; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=hCqUAAXoq/Tnx3O74zxKv5KdWfE1Wd+aULQTwp+bNE4=; b=cj07FLmRvUJQ8sRP7w5gESK4a3/uN1dHOpTY0LQDq9CPEfKFmeuVr6U4 knr926O7qKwOwhJP6dJMGjCJIaPnNvW9MtuUaEXuylYaTdBUu04/w8jIX B7AZ1lEetD7pexaSatkIIExmwscvgWBT7tghAY6HEp3jYQjrYy8ewhFmS X3m0IHjukx93m3F3seDTjLe2VvEcpm8hYY5WihfvnBTOdyrwRseqhqZnE Yh+dZPFvat4Xj1aafEyz5FZeYW7AWjFo69SbFNuGVT3q3gUBy3ogD2XP0 q/Jv4eMSMh9SBa6HrNpJspdIKdSudoPOuBRtqpdGRCM17ujb3nGu16i9D Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: cYdiK8YKR3Wy4BX1ii8RdQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: tFiQlNTOQCiyWQ+s7pa57w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11676"; a="70123456" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,239,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="70123456" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by orvoesa110.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jan 2026 14:57:53 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: ofx34AQbQv+lkGBdXbcnvQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: X/zQ0/LRTJ6jdFZh0qspDA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,239,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="210449501" Received: from administrator-system-product-name.igk.intel.com ([10.91.214.181]) by fmviesa005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jan 2026 14:57:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 23:57:49 +0100 (CET) From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Micha=B3_Grzelak?= To: Jani Nikula cc: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Micha=B3_Grzelak?= , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [v2] drm/{i915, xe}/pcode: move display pcode calls to parent interface In-Reply-To: <037265c310c9f3901e2e47d00e2e225c76370f94@intel.com> Message-ID: <21d8ca2f-c021-ac5f-4807-272890d39ab1@intel.com> References: <20260115113337.4079184-1-jani.nikula@intel.com> <037265c310c9f3901e2e47d00e2e225c76370f94@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-2043904845-1768863472=:3942884" X-BeenThere: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Xe graphics driver List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-xe" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-2043904845-1768863472=:3942884 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 19 Jan 2026, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026, Michał Grzelak wrote: >> While moving the code, should we rename val & val1 into val1 & val2 (or >> val2 & val1)? I think even renaming val -> val0 would suffice. > > The variable naming matches the register macro naming. Historically, > there was only GEN6_PCODE_DATA, and GEN6_PCODE_DATA1 was added > afterwards. Hence val and val1. > > Nowadays the spec has DATA0 and DATA1, so renaming both the register > macro and the variable to DATA0 and val0, respectively, would be fine. One question though: should the renaming include also variable from functions which take only val as argument instead of val & val1? E.g. should we rename val->val0 from snb_pcode_write_timeout() or is it unnecessary? Asking since unsure if the argument consistenly references generic variable name or former register macro. BR, Michał > > Just not in this patch. Generally, only do one thing at a time. > >> Or (if the comment is valid) should I send it as a separate patch? > > The latter. > >> Reviewed-by: Michał Grzelak > > Thanks, > Jani. > > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel > --8323329-2043904845-1768863472=:3942884--