linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] drm/msm/dpu: drop TE2 definitions

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <c430aabe-cdf1-431b-b86e-e0b7939a21da@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 11:27:40 -0700
From: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
CC: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Rob Clark
	<robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
        Marijn Suijten
	<marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, "Simona
 Vetter" <simona@...ll.ch>,
        Barnabás Czémán
	<barnabas.czeman@...nlining.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] drm/msm/dpu: drop TE2 definitions



On 4/29/2025 5:16 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 06:33:05PM -0700, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/1/2025 1:24 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> Neither DPU driver nor vendor SDE driver do not use TE2 definitions
>>> (and, in case of SDE driver, never did). Semantics of the TE2 feature
>>> bit and .te2 sblk are not completely clear. Drop these bits from the
>>> catalog with the possibility of reintroducing them later if we need to
>>> support ppsplit.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_1_7_msm8996.h |  8 ++++----
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_0_msm8998.h |  8 ++++----
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_2_sdm660.h  |  8 ++++----
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_3_3_sdm630.h  |  4 ++--
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/catalog/dpu_4_0_sdm845.h  |  8 ++++----
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.c          | 17 -----------------
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_hw_catalog.h          |  6 +-----
>>>    7 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> @@ -465,22 +459,11 @@ static const struct dpu_dspp_sub_blks sdm845_dspp_sblk = {
>>>    /*************************************************************
>>>     * PINGPONG sub blocks config
>>>     *************************************************************/
>>> -static const struct dpu_pingpong_sub_blks msm8996_pp_sblk_te = {
>>> -	.te2 = {.name = "te2", .base = 0x2000, .len = 0x0,
>>> -		.version = 0x1},
>>> -};
>>>    static const struct dpu_pingpong_sub_blks msm8996_pp_sblk = {
>>>    	/* No dither block */
>>>    };
>>> -static const struct dpu_pingpong_sub_blks sdm845_pp_sblk_te = {
>>> -	.te2 = {.name = "te2", .base = 0x2000, .len = 0x0,
>>> -		.version = 0x1},
>>> -	.dither = {.name = "dither", .base = 0x30e0,
>>> -		.len = 0x20, .version = 0x10000},
>>> -};
>>> -
>>
>> Agreed about TE2. I do not see even te2 sub-block programming in
>> dpu_hw_pingpong but why do we also need to drop dither?
> 
> sdm845_pp_sblk has the dither block. If you scroll the original patch,
> you'd see PPs being switched to that sblk definition.
> 

Ack,

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