intel-xe.lists.freedesktop.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
	lucas.demarchi@intel.com, ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 2/4] drm/i915/display: add generic to_intel_display() macro
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:28:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zfvawa9y.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZeizBzI-yv_fwdmx@intel.com>

On Wed, 06 Mar 2024, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 02:24:36PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> Convert various pointers to struct intel_display * using _Generic().
>> 
>> Add some macro magic to make adding new conversions easier, and somewhat
>> abstract the need to cast each generic association. The cast is required
>> because all associations needs to compile, regardless of the type and
>> the generic selection.
>> 
>> The use of *p in the generic selection assignment expression removes the
>> need to add separate associations for const pointers.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h    | 46 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h
>> index e67cd5b02e84..3f63a5a74d77 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_types.h
>> @@ -2183,4 +2183,50 @@ static inline int to_bpp_x16(int bpp)
>>  	return bpp << 4;
>>  }
>>  
>> +/*
>> + * Conversion functions/macros from various pointer types to struct
>> + * intel_display pointer.
>> + */
>> +static inline struct intel_display *__drm_device_to_intel_display(const struct drm_device *drm)
>> +{
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Assume there's a pointer to struct intel_display in memory right
>> +	 * after struct drm_device.
>> +	 */
>> +	struct intel_display **p = (struct intel_display **)(drm + 1);
>
> at least this patch and the first one should be together to help the
> 'magic' to be understood and confirmed safe.

Yes. I just kept them separate while still juggling the whole thing.

And it occurs to me we could make *this* the first patch in the series,
by making the above function:

static inline struct intel_display *__drm_device_to_intel_display(const struct drm_device *drm)
{
	return &to_i915(drm)->display;
}

Then we could only add the struct drm_device *drm backpointer in struct
intel_display from patch 1, and proceed with patches 3-4, avoiding the
whole magic thing for starters. It would unblock a whole lot of
refactoring as the first step.

>
>> +
>> +	return *p;
>> +}
>> +
>> +#define __intel_connector_to_intel_display(p)		\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display((p)->base.dev)
>> +#define __intel_crtc_to_intel_display(p)		\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display((p)->base.dev)
>> +#define __intel_crtc_state_to_intel_display(p)			\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display((p)->uapi.crtc->dev)
>> +#define __intel_digital_port_to_intel_display(p)		\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display((p)->base.base.dev)
>> +#define __intel_encoder_to_intel_display(p)		\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display((p)->base.dev)
>> +#define __intel_hdmi_to_intel_display(p)	\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display(hdmi_to_dig_port(p)->base.base.dev)
>> +#define __intel_dp_to_intel_display(p)	\
>> +	__drm_device_to_intel_display(dp_to_dig_port(p)->base.base.dev)
>> +
>> +/* Helper for generic association. Map types to conversion functions/macros. */
>> +#define __assoc(type, p) \
>> +	struct type: __##type##_to_intel_display((struct type *)(p))
>> +
>> +/* Convert various pointer types to struct intel_display pointer. */
>> +#define to_intel_display(p)				\
>
> For a moment I almost complained of this because of the generic magic,
> but mostly because I had guc related code in mind where you can never
> find the definition, but here it is different. the used 'to_intel_display'
> can easily be searched by cscope/ctags and then you are able to see
> below what are the accepted cases, so I ended up liking it.

Yay!

I also tried to put effort into making this easily extensible. Add a
__<FROM-STRUCT>_to_intel_display(p) macro or function, and
__assoc(<FROM-STRUCT>, p) in the association list below, and it just
works.

BR,
Jani.

>
>> +	_Generic(*p,					\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_connector, p),		\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_crtc, p),		\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_crtc_state, p),		\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_digital_port, p),	\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_encoder, p),		\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_hdmi, p),		\
>> +		 __assoc(intel_dp, p),			\
>> +		 __assoc(drm_device, p))
>> +
>>  #endif /*  __INTEL_DISPLAY_TYPES_H__ */
>> -- 
>> 2.39.2
>> 

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-07 11:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-06 12:24 [RFC v2 0/4] drm/i915: better high level abstraction for display Jani Nikula
2024-03-06 12:24 ` [RFC v2 1/4] drm/i915/display: ideas for further separating display code from the rest Jani Nikula
2024-03-06 12:42   ` Jani Nikula
2024-03-06 12:24 ` [RFC v2 2/4] drm/i915/display: add generic to_intel_display() macro Jani Nikula
2024-03-06 18:16   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-03-07 11:28     ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2024-03-07 13:43       ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-03-06 12:24 ` [RFC v2 3/4] drm/i915/display: accept either i915 or display for feature tests Jani Nikula
2024-03-06 12:24 ` [RFC v2 4/4] drm/i915/display: test various to_intel_display() scenarios Jani Nikula
2024-03-06 12:29 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/i915: better high level abstraction for display Patchwork
2024-03-06 12:29 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-03-06 12:30 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-03-06 12:41 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-03-06 12:41 ` ✗ CI.Hooks: failure " Patchwork
2024-03-06 12:43 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2024-03-06 13:11 ` ✓ CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2024-03-06 18:23 ` [RFC v2 0/4] " Rodrigo Vivi

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=87zfvawa9y.fsf@intel.com \
    --to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).