On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 04:29:47PM +0000, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote: > On Tue, 2020-02-25 at 19:11 +0200, Ville Syrjala wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > > > Polish some of the dbuf code to give more meaningful debug > > messages and whatnot. Also we can switch over to the per-device > > debugs/warns at the same time. > > > > Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > --- > > .../drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c | 40 +++++++++------ > > ---- > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c > > index 6e25a1317161..e81e561e8ac0 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.c > > @@ -4433,11 +4433,12 @@ static void > > intel_power_domains_sync_hw(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > mutex_unlock(&power_domains->lock); > > } > > > > -static inline > > -bool intel_dbuf_slice_set(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > - i915_reg_t reg, bool enable) > > +static void intel_dbuf_slice_set(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > + enum dbuf_slice slice, bool enable) > > { > > - u32 val, status; > > + i915_reg_t reg = DBUF_CTL_S(slice); > > + bool state; > > + u32 val; > > > > val = intel_de_read(dev_priv, reg); > > val = enable ? (val | DBUF_POWER_REQUEST) : (val & > > ~DBUF_POWER_REQUEST); > > @@ -4445,13 +4446,10 @@ bool intel_dbuf_slice_set(struct > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > intel_de_posting_read(dev_priv, reg); > > udelay(10); > > > > - status = intel_de_read(dev_priv, reg) & DBUF_POWER_STATE; > > - if ((enable && !status) || (!enable && status)) { > > - drm_err(&dev_priv->drm, "DBus power %s timeout!\n", > > - enable ? "enable" : "disable"); > > - return false; > > - } > > - return true; > > + state = intel_de_read(dev_priv, reg) & DBUF_POWER_STATE; > > + drm_WARN(&dev_priv->drm, enable != state, > > + "DBuf slice %d power %s timeout!\n", > > + slice, enable ? "enable" : "disable"); > > } > > > > static void gen9_dbuf_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > @@ -4467,14 +4465,16 @@ static void gen9_dbuf_disable(struct > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv) > > void icl_dbuf_slices_update(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > u8 req_slices) > > { > > - int i; > > - int max_slices = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)- > > >num_supported_dbuf_slices; > > + int num_slices = INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)- > > >num_supported_dbuf_slices; > > struct i915_power_domains *power_domains = &dev_priv- > > >power_domains; > > + enum dbuf_slice slice; > > > > - drm_WARN(&dev_priv->drm, hweight8(req_slices) > max_slices, > > - "Invalid number of dbuf slices requested\n"); > > + drm_WARN(&dev_priv->drm, req_slices & ~(BIT(num_slices) - 1), > > + "Invalid set of dbuf slices (0x%x) requested (num dbuf > > slices %d)\n", > > + req_slices, num_slices); > > > > - DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Updating dbuf slices to 0x%x\n", req_slices); > > + drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm, > > + "Updating dbuf slices to 0x%x\n", req_slices); > > > > /* > > * Might be running this in parallel to > > gen9_dc_off_power_well_enable > > @@ -4485,11 +4485,9 @@ void icl_dbuf_slices_update(struct > > drm_i915_private *dev_priv, > > */ > > mutex_lock(&power_domains->lock); > > > > - for (i = 0; i < max_slices; i++) { > > - intel_dbuf_slice_set(dev_priv, > > - DBUF_CTL_S(i), > > - (req_slices & BIT(i)) != 0); > > - } > > + for (slice = DBUF_S1; slice < num_slices; slice++) > > + intel_dbuf_slice_set(dev_priv, slice, > > + req_slices & BIT(slice)); > > Would be cool to completely get rid of any magic numbers or > definitions, 0 in a sense is more universal here than DBUF_S1. > > If we are counting slices as numbers it seems logical that we > iterate [0..num_slices) range. If you want to name the first slice > explicitly then it probably has to be something like iterator > logic, i.e for (slice = FIRST_SLICE; slice != LAST_SLICE; slice++). > > But trying to name it at the same time with comparing to total _amount_ > looks a bit confusing.
This is the standard pattern used all over the driver. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
