Hi Laurent, On 12/09/17 20:18, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Kieran, > > On Tuesday, 12 September 2017 00:42:09 EEST Kieran Bingham wrote: >> On 17/08/17 18:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> On Monday 14 Aug 2017 16:13:29 Kieran Bingham wrote: >>>> Currently the entities store their configurations into a display list. >>>> Adapt this such that the code can be configured into a body fragment >>>> directly, allowing greater flexibility and control of the content. >>>> >>>> All users of vsp1_dl_list_write() are removed in this process, thus it >>>> too is removed. >>>> >>>> A helper, vsp1_dl_list_body() is provided to access the internal body0 >>>> from the display list. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+rene...@ideasonboard.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_bru.c | 22 ++++++------ >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_clu.c | 22 ++++++------ >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_dl.c | 12 ++----- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_dl.h | 2 +- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_drm.c | 14 +++++--- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_entity.c | 16 ++++----- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_entity.h | 12 ++++--- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_hgo.c | 16 ++++----- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_hgt.c | 18 +++++----- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_hsit.c | 10 +++--- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_lif.c | 13 +++---- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_lut.c | 21 ++++++------ >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_pipe.c | 4 +- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_pipe.h | 3 +- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_rpf.c | 43 +++++++++++------------- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_sru.c | 14 ++++---- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_uds.c | 24 +++++++------ >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_uds.h | 2 +- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_video.c | 11 ++++-- >>>> drivers/media/platform/vsp1/vsp1_wpf.c | 42 ++++++++++++----------- >>>> 20 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 153 deletions(-) >>> >>> This is quite intrusive, and it bothers me slightly that we need to pass >>> both the DL and the DLB to the configure function in order to add >>> fragments to the DL in the CLU and LUT modules. Wouldn't it be simpler to >>> add a pointer to the current body in the DL structure, and modify >>> vsp1_dl_list_write() to write to the current fragment ? >> >> No doubt about it, 168+, 153- is certainly intrusive. >> >> Yes, now I'm looking back at this, I think this does look like this part is >> not quite the right approach. >> >> Which otherwise stalls the series until I have time to reconsider. I will >> likely repost the work I have done on the earlier patches, including the >> 's/fragment/body/g' changes and ready myself for a v4 which will contain the >> heavier reworks. > > Fine with me. Could you make sure to mention the open issues in the cover > letter ? I want to avoid commenting on them if you know already that you will > rework them later.
I've been trying to tackle this today, but I think I've come up a bit stuck on a key part. The reason for this patch, is to allow the functions to configure directly into a display list body, even when that body *is not part* of a display list. So - converting vsp1_dl_list_write() to configure into the 'current' body (was fragment) of a display list would not work for writing to the cached objects - which do not have a display list. They are simply body objects. It seems a bit extraneous to create holding display lists to contain a single body, when the display list itself will never be used, but I can't think of an alternative. Would you prefer this 'container display list' approach? or do you have another idea? -- Regards Kieran
