Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] drm/rockchip: vop: move write_relaxed flags to vop
 register
To: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
References: <1500518564-30371-1-git-send-email-mark.yao@rock-chips.com>
 <1500518608-30538-1-git-send-email-mark.yao@rock-chips.com>
 <2048476.V4PpOSpEqb@phil>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: Mark yao <mark.yao@rock-chips.com>
Message-ID: <597833F3.4050307@rock-chips.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:17:23 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2048476.V4PpOSpEqb@phil>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2904
Lines: 73

On 2017年07月26日 05:47, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2017, 10:43:27 CEST schrieb Mark Yao:
>> Since the drm atomic framework, only a small part of the vop
>> register needs sync write, Currently seems only following registers
>> need sync write:
>>     cfg_done, standby and interrupt related register.
>>
>> All ctrl registers are using the sync write method that is
>> inefficient, hardcode the write_relaxed flags to vop registers,
>> then can only do synchronize write for those actual needed register.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Yao <mark.yao@rock-chips.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c | 14 +++-------
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_vop_reg.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++-------------
>>   2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c
>> index 81164d6..784a2b7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c
>> @@ -42,18 +42,12 @@
>>   #include "rockchip_drm_psr.h"
>>   #include "rockchip_drm_vop.h"
>>   
>> -#define __REG_SET_RELAXED(x, off, mask, shift, v, write_mask) \
>> -		vop_mask_write(x, off, mask, shift, v, write_mask, true)
>> -
>> -#define __REG_SET_NORMAL(x, off, mask, shift, v, write_mask) \
>> -		vop_mask_write(x, off, mask, shift, v, write_mask, false)
>> -
>>   #define REG_SET(x, base, reg, v, mode) \
>> -		__REG_SET_##mode(x, base + reg.offset, \
>> -				 reg.mask, reg.shift, v, reg.write_mask)
>> +		vop_mask_write(x, base + reg.offset, reg.mask, reg.shift, \
>> +			       v, reg.write_mask, reg.relaxed)
>>   #define REG_SET_MASK(x, base, reg, mask, v, mode) \
>> -		__REG_SET_##mode(x, base + reg.offset, \
>> -				 mask, reg.shift, v, reg.write_mask)
>> +		vop_mask_write(x, base + reg.offset, \
>> +			       mask, reg.shift, v, reg.write_mask, reg.relaxed)
> you only introduce the relaxed element of struct vop_reg in patch4.
> So using it here produces a compile error
>
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c: In function ‘vop_cfg_done’:
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c:47:33: error: ‘const struct vop_reg’ has no member named ‘relaxed’
>             v, reg.write_mask, reg.relaxed)
>                                   ^
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c:59:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘REG_SET’
>     REG_SET(x, 0, (x)->data->ctrl->name, v, NORMAL)
>     ^~~~~~~
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_vop.c:201:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘VOP_CTRL_SET’
>    VOP_CTRL_SET(vop, cfg_done, 1);
>    ^~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> when only patches 1+2 are applied. So the relaxed field addition should
> definitly move into this patch to not break bisectability.
>
>
> Heiko
>
>
>
>
Hi Heiko

Thanks for the test, will fix it at next version.

-- 
Ｍark Yao