[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <de807810-ab84-49eb-a96a-080f44452205@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 13:00:19 +0200
From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/panel: visionox-vtdr6130: switch to mipi_dsi
wrapped functions
On 28/08/2024 18:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 9:03 AM Neil Armstrong
> <neil.armstrong@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> Make usage of the new _multi() mipi_dsi functions instead of the
>> deprecated macros, improving error handling and printing.
>>
>> bloat-o-meter gives a 12% gain on arm64:
>> Function old new delta
>> visionox_vtdr6130_unprepare 208 204 -4
>> visionox_vtdr6130_prepare 1192 896 -296
>> Total: Before=2348, After=2048, chg -12.78%
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c | 186 +++++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 104 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c
>> index 540099253e1b..ebe92871dbb6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c
>> @@ -40,120 +40,103 @@ static void visionox_vtdr6130_reset(struct visionox_vtdr6130 *ctx)
>> static int visionox_vtdr6130_on(struct visionox_vtdr6130 *ctx)
>> {
>> struct mipi_dsi_device *dsi = ctx->dsi;
>> - struct device *dev = &dsi->dev;
>> - int ret;
>> + struct mipi_dsi_multi_context dsi_ctx = { .dsi = dsi };
>>
>> dsi->mode_flags |= MIPI_DSI_MODE_LPM;
>
> This isn't something you introduced in your patch, but I wonder if we
> should avoid setting the "MIPI_DSI_MODE_LPM" bit when the function
> returns an error?
Yeah it's unrelated to this change, but I'll investigate.
>
> In any case:
>
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Thanks,
Neil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists