Re: [PATCH 03/12] drm/msm/dpu: use format-related definitions from mdp_common.xml.h

[Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>]

On 4/10/2024 7:38 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 at 02:54, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/10/2024 2:12 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 01:18:42PM -0700, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/10/2024 1:16 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 at 23:00, Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/2/2023 1:40 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>>>> Instead of having DPU-specific defines, switch to the definitions from
>>>>>>> the mdp_common.xml.h file. This is the preparation for merged of DPU and
>>>>>>> MDP format tables.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adding MDP_***__ usages in DPU driver is quite confusing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can we align to a common naming scheme such as DISP_***?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's not something display-generic. It is specific to MDP
>>>>> platforms. In the end DPU is a continuation of the MDP lineup, isn't
>>>>> it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No some aspects of the hw are completely different as you already know
>>>> between MDP4/MDP5 and DPU. Bringing back MDP usages into DPU does not seem
>>>> right.
>>>
>>> MDP4 is different, it's true. But there is a lot of common between MDP5
>>> and DPU. Frakly speaking, I don't see an issue with using the constant
>>> that was defined for MDP5 for DPU layer. Especially since we are also
>>> going to use mdp_ functions for format handling.
>>>
>>
>> All the HW naming etc in the doc has migrated to DPU and in fact it only
>> makes sense to start using DPU for MDP5 as we plan to move mdp5 targets
>> to DPU anyway. Not the other way around.
>>
>> MDP4 remains different.
>>
>> How about MSM_DISP then? I dont get why this is MDP platform specific.
>> Because the term MDP no longer holds true for DPU.
>>
>> I am even looking for future chipsets. We cannot live with MDP5 names.
>> Have to think of generic names for formats.
> 
> Another point: MDP_ is still frequently used in the DPU driver. See
> dpu_hwio.h, dpu_hw_catalog.h or dpu_hw_interrupts.c
> 

As I wrote in 
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/570148/?series=127230&rev=1, 
lets go ahead with the MDP naming which you have. If we see its not
working out later on, please be open to a mass renaming that time.

With that expectation set,


Reviewed-by: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>