linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/msm/dpu: Drop unused num argument from relevant macros

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a87e51e5-416f-307f-fe7c-368a5942e998@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jun 2023 03:15:12 +0300
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Ryan McCann <quic_rmccann@...cinc.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
        Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] drm/msm/dpu: Drop unused num argument from relevant
 macros

On 23/06/2023 02:57, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 23/06/2023 02:48, Ryan McCann wrote:
>> Drop unused parameter "num" from VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE and DMA sub block
>> macros. Update calls to relevant macros to reflect change.
> 
> This is not relevant for this patchset.

Ok, after reviewing the rest of the patches, I see that it is indeed 
relevant. However could you please follow another path (outlined in the 
review for patch 6).

Note, that for the sake of subblock dumping we can ignore the issue with 
the names completely and drop them in the separate patchset.

> 
> With https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/534745/?series=116851&rev=2 
> in place, VIG_SBLK and VIG_SBLK_ROT should also stop using num. But 
> let's probably take another step forward and drop both arguments and use 
> just a single instance of sblk per platform. I'll send a patch for it.
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ryan McCann <quic_rmccann@...cinc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c | 22 
>> +++++++++++-----------
>>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>> index 0de507d4d7b7..69200b4cf210 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c
>> @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ static const uint32_t wb2_formats[] = {
>>       .rotation_cfg = rot_cfg, \
>>       }
>> -#define _DMA_SBLK(num, sdma_pri) \
>> +#define _DMA_SBLK(sdma_pri) \
>>       { \
>>       .maxdwnscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
>>       .maxupscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
>> @@ -323,10 +323,10 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks 
>> sdm845_vig_sblk_2 =
>>   static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_vig_sblk_3 =
>>                   _VIG_SBLK("3", 8, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED3);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_0 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("8", 1);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_1 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("9", 2);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_2 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("10", 3);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_3 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("11", 4);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_0 = _DMA_SBLK(1);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_1 = _DMA_SBLK(2);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_2 = _DMA_SBLK(3);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sdm845_dma_sblk_3 = _DMA_SBLK(4);
>>   #define SSPP_BLK(_name, _id, _base, _len, _features, \
>>           _sblk, _xinid, _type, _clkctrl) \
>> @@ -365,11 +365,11 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks 
>> sm8550_vig_sblk_1 =
>>   static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_vig_sblk_2 =
>>                   _VIG_SBLK("2", 9, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED4);
>>   static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_vig_sblk_3 =
>> -                _VIG_SBLK("3", 10, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED4);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_4 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("12", 5);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_5 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("13", 6);
>> +                _VIG_SBLK(10, DPU_SSPP_SCALER_QSEED4);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_4 = _DMA_SBLK(5);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks sm8550_dma_sblk_5 = _DMA_SBLK(6);
>> -#define _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE(num, sdma_pri) \
>> +#define _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE(sdma_pri) \
>>       { \
>>       .maxdwnscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
>>       .maxupscale = SSPP_UNITY_SCALE, \
>> @@ -380,8 +380,8 @@ static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks 
>> sm8550_dma_sblk_5 = _DMA_SBLK("13", 6);
>>       .virt_num_formats = ARRAY_SIZE(plane_formats), \
>>       }
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_vig_sblk_0 = 
>> _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE("0", 2);
>> -static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_dma_sblk_0 = 
>> _DMA_SBLK("8", 1);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_vig_sblk_0 = 
>> _VIG_SBLK_NOSCALE(2);
>> +static const struct dpu_sspp_sub_blks qcm2290_dma_sblk_0 = _DMA_SBLK(1);
>>   /*************************************************************
>>    * MIXER sub blocks config
>>
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry